Well, first of all, I would like to say that I'm absolutely delighted and honored to be here today among Samsung's friends from a long time. I realize, I mean, I've known you for a long time too. Yes, I think we met between 89 and 91 in Chicago, where I just moved from Europe for one of my postdocs before going to Durham in England. And I vividly remember the lively conversations that we had, especially at lunchtime, with Jeff, about physics, of course, but also about politics. Yes, and... Jeff also just moved. He had just moved, yes. And indeed, the anecdote is that I was a young postdoc, and everybody told me, you're going to Chicago, but Friedan and Schenker have left. This is going to be dead territory there. And then, of course, I said, fine, I mean, I'll go anyway. And then I arrived, surprised. Jeff was there and you were there. And he was, he also was there for a while. Yes. So it was great times. And since then, I think we have met in many, many places, sometimes unexpectedly, yes, but always with great pleasure, right? So, right. So my talk today is covering several works that I've done with Catherine Wendland, with my long-term collaborator. Certainly, since 2010, you can see a bit of a timeline there. So all started, really, just before I met Samson, when I was in Paris, actually, a day called normal. And Eguchi, Toru Eguchi, was a visitor for a year. And I was a postdoc there for a year. And we started talking about n equals 4 super conformal algebras in two dimensions. And we worked out the representation theory, unitary representations of these super conformal algebras. And we stumbled against a new phenomenon that at the time we couldn't deal with, is that the characters unlike what happened for other super conformal algebras at n equals 2, at no regime where the theory is rational. And this was the very first instance that we discovered many years later of a phenomenon that has to do with mock modular forms, which have been developed by Zagier and Zweger's in the 2000s, right? So we were a bit in the dark. So we published whatever we could. We calculated the elliptic genus of the K3 surface by these methods. And in, as you will see in the talk, in doing so, we came up with some numbers that became extremely interesting in 2010. So that's why I've put 2010 there. So we'll see why. And then since then, with Catherine in particular, we have followed a very specific line of investigation to try to understand these numbers in the context of string theory. Right. So the plan of the talk is to remind or to tell you what the elliptic genus of K3 is, and what it counts. It counts in particular what I've called quarter BPS test. I will tell you what this is. And then I will introduce this mysterious phenomenon that has to do with the numbers I was mentioning before, which is called Matthew moonshine.  And then one particular type of non-generic K3 theories are Z2 or before of toroidal kofomofii theories. Right. And these ones give you a very practical way, hands-on way to try to explore the nature of these states that are counted by these magic numbers. And finally, I will conclude with a hope because the problem is not solved. It's still open, but Katrin in particular has spent a little bit of time into studying refinements of the elliptic genus that started the story there. And this, we think, might be very helpful in understanding the Matthew moonshine phenomenon beyond the mathematical reality of it, which is proven by the way. So mathematically we understand what the structure is, but we don't know what on this sporadic group that I'm going to talk about, which is Matthew 24. That's why there's a Matthew there, comes into string theory. Right. So to set the scene a little bit, I just want to define what my framework of theory is. These are two-dimensional superconformer field theories. And I take the unitary case here, which possess n equals 2.2, which is supersymmetry, but also spacetime supersymmetry. And the spacetime supersymmetry is actually, let's say, induced by the fact that you have a U1 in the n equals two superconformal algebra. And then the spectral flow generator helps defining the generator of supersymmetry in spacetime. And we look at theories which have the central charge in the left sector and the right sector, which coincide, which are equal, and which are quantized in units of three. So three times D, where D, capital D there, will end up being the dimension of the manifolds, the target manifolds in the nonlinear sigma models that play a central role here. The space of states of these theories is this capital H there. You have the Neville-Schwarz and the Hamon sector. So this is both left and right here. So there are the boundary conditions that dictate what is in Neville-Schwarz within Hamon. And then in particular, I'm not saying that all the conditions and all the axioms for superconformer field theory two dimensions are on the board there, but only the important ones for today is that we have four zero-mode operators there, J zero, J bar zero, T zero, which you see is topological twist, T zero minus half J zero, and T bar zero there, which commute, which are self-adjoint, diagonalizable, and which are semi-definite positive for T zero and T zero bar. This algebra is enhanced, right, to a duck algebra for special D? It is indeed. And very soon, and very soon I'm going to set D equals to two because this is a Calabria two-fold hypercaler, K three. Sorry? That would be an odd duck algebra. No, I'm going to talk about, well, did your enhancement, if you have a spectral flow which has, what, is the N equals four superconformal algebra? So odd duck is a sequence nine, isn't it? But I don't know if you could.  Never called it like this. For me, it's sequence nine. Okay, never mind. But we are on the same wavelength. Well, I call this algebra N equals four here. Okay? Right, so what's important for later is a part of the partition function of these theories, which are in the so-called Ramon twisted sector. So the full partition functions that Neville Schwartz and Ramon and twisted Neville Schwartz and twisted Ramon. But if we concentrate on that particular sector, what we do is that we take a super trace. Now, I've written it in different ways here, because I'm going to jump from, actually, use more this formulation here. But because usually people see the partition function in that sector written like this, where we keep track of the quantum numbers associated with the T0 operator, not T0 yet, L0 in this language, so the energy essentially, and this one which keeps track of the U1 quantum number in both left and right sector. In the S here, I've hidden this operator that I've explicitly written in the second line here, which basically counts bosonic and fermionic degrees of freedom with a sign. So if you have N bosons and N fermions, then because of this super trace, they cancel in the counting. So you are losing, we will see what happens later on. So in the partition function, it's just counting with a sign there. Because of the properties of the partition function, you have restriction on the spectrum of these operators there, which I will use as well. And it's a beautiful, automorphic form, this partition function here. You see that under the S modular transformation, which links Z, sorry, tau, N minus 1 over tau, it's not 1 here, but it has a nice behavior anyway, where the central charge plays a role. Right. So if now we take this partition function that I just showed you, and we set the Y bar, so the U1, what was keeping track of the U1 on the right-hand side, on the bar, then we have a definition of what the conformal field theoretic elliptic genus of such theories is. And this is the first line here. And I've chosen to use the trace over the Neva-Schwarz states here, where now you see that I've put T0 here, not L0. Right. Now it turns out because of supersymmetry, many of these states in the trace here, once you put Y bar is equal to 1, are going to cancel. And what you're left with is only a trace over the kernel of this operator here. So from here to here, I have implemented a consequence of supersymmetry. And this object is an invariant because since I restrict to 0 eigenvalues of T bar 0, and I told you that the spectrum of T bar 0 minus T0 in the previous transparency is an integer, so it means that T0 here is going to have integer values, and therefore it's going to be producing an invariant because we can smoothly deform it and it stays an integer number. And now if you look carefully at these type of expressions in these theories, you see that because now Y bar being 1, there is a whole set of states inside here that are going to cancel in the right sector, in the bar sector, because there will be some which are fermions and some which are bosons, and a certain number will just cancel each other. So basically the elliptic genus gives you less information than the partition function, of course, and what's important is that you can now rephrase it as an invariant where you trace now under a subspace of Kerr T0 bar here. And this space here is going to be just what I call a generic space of states, so these are the states that stay after the cancellations I've just talked about. And this is going to be a very important space to make hopefully progress with this program. So the elliptic genus here expressed in terms of Jacobi theta function is something that we calculated a long time ago with conformal field theory techniques. And I should say what I was talking to Samsung about a minute ago is that I will, most of my talk restrict to what I call a K3 theory, which is one of the previous general theories that I defined before, but taking the center charge c equals 6. But of course at c equals 6, you have n equals 4, super symmetry, super conformal symmetries that we know, but we have two classes of theories. We have Tori and we have K3 theories. The Tori have an elliptic genus, which is zero trivial. And of course if you have this elliptic genus, then you know that you have a K3 theory. Now there are some subtleties about K3 theories that it's widely believed that all K3 theories are realizable as non-linear sigma models on the K3 surface, but it's not proven mathematically. But of course I will always refer to the non-linear sigma model in my talk. Right. So because we have an n equals 4 super symmetry there, it's possible to decompose the elliptic genus into n equals 4 characters, the characters that we computed with Eguchi a long time ago at DE Linness. Right. And when you do, and we did that at the time, and we came with this type of expression. Now today this is not going to be my concern at all, but it's because actually we are even more in the dark about the interpretation of this sector of the elliptic genus than we are about this one. But these are characters, unitary characters of n equals 4 for short representations or massless representations, as we used to call them at the time. So, and this one here, this object here, in itself is not a character. You have to think of it as being a common factor, which when multiplied by q to some power of h, h being an eigenvalue of L0, will give you a character. And this power of q is actually encoded in this function of tau here, which I've written here. Right. So a of tau is a power series in q, and each time that you fix n here, q to this fixed n times this object there is an n equals 4 characters. Right. So it is a decomposition in n equals 4 characters. And these numbers are the magic numbers that I was talking about before. Right. Now let's talk about them, then I will come back to this. For 20 years, almost, we didn't know what to do with these numbers. And then Eguchi and Oguri and Tashikawa were in Aspen one summer. And Toru, I understand, knew something about K3 surfaces, of course, but also about the group of symplectic automorphisms of K3. And all of these groups are subgroups of M23, so the sporadic group, Matthew 23. So he opened the atlas with these other two friends there. And they looked at the character table for M23. And things didn't quite fit. They found in the characters for the identity, which is the dimension of the representation, they found numbers that were reminiscent of these ones but not quite. And then they had this genial idea to go and look at M24. And there, clack, clack, clack. They found that 90 is twice 45. And 45 is one of the reducible representation of M24. 462 is twice 231. And 231 is an irreducible representation of M24. And so on and so forth. Of course, there are only 26 irreducible representation of M24. This is an infinite series. So what happens after a while is that you get reducible representations, but you can always decompose them, of course, in irreducible ones. And if you do this for long enough, you see that all the irreducible representations come in. And that was proven by Gannon. So there is a mathematical proof that these numbers here are really to do with M24 and nothing else. Yes, there can be multiplicities. If you go far away, these numbers grow very fast here. Right? So you have only 26 building blocks, so they have to come with multiplicity. Is there a simple expression for large n? There are asymptotic formulas for large n. For an, you want to know an, yes? Yes, there are. So Eguchi and Ikami have worked these things in the context of black holes and the entropy. You won't tell me, right? Sorry? You will not tell me, that's the problem, right? I'm not going to. I'm not going to use it. I'm sorry. Disappoint me. Oh, I'm sorry to disappoint you. Why would you? I can talk to you privately afterwards and show you nice formulas. Right. Okay. So terminology here in this elliptic genus, actually because of this y bar being one, it means that you project into a sector which is short representation on the right or massless. While on the left, I haven't done anything to the y on the left, so I get a mix of massless and massive. What I call a quarter BPS here are basically states which are massive on the left and massless on the right. So it's not the full BPS spectrum here, but only part of it, right? But this sector here, as I said, is encoded into this part and this minus two here is not a clean business yet. I mean, so people think that might involve virtual representations of M24, but we haven't studied that yet. Right. So this phenomenon here is called Matthew Moonshine because these are coefficients of a mock modular form, right? And then suddenly the number theories got interested, but it's linked to group theory and to string theory in a way that nobody expected, right? Right. So then we have minus two is not simply a fermionic representation. Yes, let me see. So the minus two, it has to do with the vacuum in the Navier-Schwarz sector, right? No, you get signs because of the grading, that's true, but the story is much more complicated than just counting of fermions and bosons, the understanding of this, right? It's the written index of this representation, the vacuum representation. But you say the minus two is mysterious. The fact that in the decomposition here, if you want to reinterpret in terms of, let's say, N equals four characters, you are forced into this pattern here with a minus sign there. And it is intrinsically due to this, but we don't understand the meaning, but these are not representation of M24, you see? Even if you take plus two here, okay, you can say it's one plus one, but it's not that. So it's mysterious, nobody understands that. First 26 terms is twice the dimension of representation. It is, and that's as well, always. It's always an even number, twice, yes. And the twice is because you have the representation, it's complex conjugate. So when you say 90, it's 45 plus 45 bar. And of course, some representations are real, so there you have a multiplicity two, right? And this is proven as well. So the people prove that all the entries are integers, that they are even and positive. So all this is under control. And it's a mock modular form, whatever this is, this is not the talk today. Right. So now, to be clear on notations here, because I'm going to use them again, what I'm writing as curly age BPS is the space of states of quarter BPS. So all the ones that appear here. And this is in a subspace and there's an injection here into the space of generic space, the space of generic states that I've introduced before in the elliptic genus here. Why is it just an injection here? Because this space here also counts things which come from here. So that's the link here. So I'm restricting myself today to this part of the story. And there's a color code here, which I hope will be consistent, is that this violet color, purple color here always has to do with the generic space of states. Right. So if you see violet, this is magenta is different. Okay. Right. So generic and non-generic K3 theories. Now, if you there is a notion of modular space for K3 theories, and we know very well one component, we think there is only one, but nobody has proven it again. But in that component, the landscape is well known of modular, modular, the modular space. And as you vary the modular, so you go from one theory to the next, you have different behaviors. And although the generic states are common to all the K3 theories, at certain points in the modular space, you have an enhancement of symmetry, maybe if you have more quarter BPS states that are going to come in. And therefore, but these quarter BPS states that you have in surplus at some points happen to cancel because of the minus one to the J0 minus J0 bar. So that's what is the philosophy of this table here, is that if you have a generic K3 theory, then you don't have, at this particular point, extra cancellations that happen. And that's what is written here. Now, if you are non-generic and the Z2 or before conformal theories are a class of such generic theories, then you have these cancellations that happen in the elliptic genus. But there are pluses and minuses in the two cases. So the plus sign for the generic is that you don't have to worry about these extra cancellations. And also for the generic one, but on the other hand, nobody knows explicitly any of these theories, so practically you can't do anything with them. On the other hand, the non-generic ones, well, we know very well these ones, they have the same spectrum of generic states, that's something that you can show. But there are cancellations. So you have to kind of navigate between the two. And today I'm going to talk more about these ones. And my last transparency will be basically about the future. So to be clear again, in non-generic K3 theories, the space of massive quarter BPS states, he didn't put the color right, should be violet, is actually not the same space as the full space of quarter BPS states, because the full space here will involve the states that cancel in the elliptic genus. For example, in Z2 conformal theory, or before the conformal theories, you see that this is what the elliptic genus measures, the numbers, the magic numbers of before. But if you look at the dimension of these spaces here, okay, you see that they are higher each time. And if you go from 90s to 102, there are 12 states. So what exactly is HM, straight HM plus structures? This one here? No, lower. Lower. Here? Yeah. This one here. Well, I'm going to say in a second, okay. So here I've not talked about H plus yet, I've just talked about these two, all right. Then you have 12 here at level one, and this is six fermions and six bosons that cancel in the elliptic genus, but they exist in the theory, okay. Now this space here is actually what is left once you have taken away. So H plus at level one here would be the 12 I've just talked about, okay. So this is what I call the excess states. So it's a bunch of fermions and bosons that cancel. And then you get the whole state. Yes, absolutely. So it's just selecting, yeah. Right. So we don't know really what drives these cancellations. And that just happened in the elliptic genus. So we wanted to understand this in a practical setting, which are these two overfold CFTs. And very, very quickly, I've jotted here what will be useful for later here is that the construction of these are from a toroidal conformal field, super conformal field theory at central charge six. And this construction here is induced by the kumar construction of K3 surfaces. So it's not by chance that it's like this. It's our deep connections between the geometry and conformal field theory there. So kumar surfaces are a special class of K3 surfaces. And they start by taking a torus T lambda, which is obviously given by C2 mod lattice, which has four real dimensions, right. So there's some geometry in here. And then we take a Z2 overfold of this torus. In the process, we get fixed point 16 of them, right. And therefore, all this is a different story from today's story. But it has to do is 16 fixed point in the conformal field theory language will corresponds to the 16 twisted sectors of the theory. So it's beautiful. And if we wanted a free field representation of the symmetry here for these theories here, we can achieve them by looking at four Dirac fermions and their super partners. And then this is the realization of these generators of n equals four in terms of these three fields. I'll come back to that a little bit later. So you will see this transparency again, decorated further later. Right. So I'm after the elliptic genus in these theories. So I start with the partition function. And I've chosen to work in the never short sector because at the end of the day, the remarks I will make at the end connect directly to the never short sector. However, in n equals four, the never short and the promo sector isomorphic to each other. So you don't lose or you don't win information. It's just a repackaging with, of course, a different physical interpretation. Right. So the partition function in the never short sector, typically in these all before theories have an untwisted sector. So this is a schematic to indicate the boundary conditions in the tau and the sigma directions. Right. So we have an untwisted and a twisted sector. And if we are interested in the generic states of the theory, then we have to remove in the full partition function here, whatever depends on the moduli. And it turns out that the moduli dependence is all in the untwisted sector. And remember, it's a conform theory. So it comes from a torus and story, you know, the high lattice and so on. So the moduli are really in that part of the theory. So I'm going to set the momentum and the winding number of the states to zero. Because if I don't, if I keep them, then I keep a dependence on the moduli because these change. So this is what I call a generic partition function. And in terms of the elliptic genus expressed in the never short sector, it can be expressed in terms of generating functions for the twisted. So this is the twisted, sorry, untwisted, read is untwisted. And this is twisted. They are written in terms of Jacobi-Titta functions again, usual things. You have to keep modes, modes, not modes, states, of course, which are either bosonic or fermionic. The details are in the paper, but it's not interesting for us today. But it turns out that mathematically, these three generating functions can be decomposed, as we know, because this is elliptic genus into an equals four representations again, right? So this is basically a slightly rewritten version of the elliptic genus from the point of view of the never short sector. But here, it's the same function as before, because the spectral flow that allows you to go from never short to Ramon is actually an operation that affects the Y dependence of your, of your object, right? And this A of tau function obviously doesn't depend on Y, right? So it's not going to move through the spectral flow. So it's no surprise that even in this repackaging here, you see the same numbers as before. Right. So now we are looking at this and right. It's a little bit more involved here, but I hope that I can make myself clear. So it's color coded. So we already know that the purple here is for generic states. The red ones are the untwisted sector, the number of states in the untwisted sector, and the blue ones are the number of states in the twisted sector, right? So this is, you have seen this, the ansatz is that this expression that you have seen before, so these are all the quarter BPS massif that I was looking at. These are the excess states that we talked about. Now what I say is that within this class of states, I have two contribution, right? And I have to explain to you what these two contributions are in a minute. But let's keep it just as a formal exercise for a minute. Then you have all the ingredients which are written here, right? And why do I call this first one h and perp? Now very briefly, I told you that all this is linked to the 16 fixed point in the Kummer construction. And then you have 16 twisted sectors in the Kummer field theory. In this 16 dimensional space, I can identify a very symmetric direction. And how do I do this? Well, I know that on this twisted space, I have an action of a geometric group. This geometric group being linked to the geometry of the tourist lambda, sorry, the tourist T lambda, the lattice I use for my tourists in the Kummer construction has some geometric symmetries. And after a few steps, basically the upshot of all this construction is that on the twisted space, this geometric group acts. And if you take a sum of all the ground states of these twisted sectors and you sum them in under the action of the group, it's an invariant because the geometric group acts as permutation of these ground states. So the typical construction. So this is what I call the diagonal direction. So in my 16 dimensional twisted space there, I have a direction which is my diagonal one and then I have everything else which is orthogonal to it. And that's the perp there. So the perp there is a 15 dimensional space there in terms of the ground states in the twisted sector. And I've chosen to write it as 15 contribution of one sector here. And the diagonal one, in a minute, we are going to split it again a little bit. The rest here is basically the leftover quarter BPS states that are generic. So all this is HBPS. These are the excess states. So that's how it is. And of course I have at my disposal the dimensions of three objects Cn, Bn and Dn. And why is this an ansatz is that by looking at the first two levels, so n equals one and n equals two, we have noticed that actually it seems, okay, sorry, right? So what I was saying here, so basically here what we know for sure is that a certain subclass of untwisted states automatically comes into the excess because basically they come with a minus sign say and there are less of them at each n than the Dn's. So we know that they are here. What we don't know is what the partners of these states are in H plus to cancel. They could come from Cn or Dn, right? And the ansatz is that none of the untwisted ones are partnering in the two Bn's in the excess sector. So this remains to be proven for general n but it turns out that Keller and Zade recently have shown that for n equals one in a way it's not so difficult there because for C1 here, C1 is zero. So what they've shown is that anything in the excess sector here was actually lifting off the BPS bound when you deform the theory. So you go away from the Kummer point, you introduce CFT deformations and then these states don't stay BPS, right? So therefore they are not generic, right? So let's say what's behind all this. Is there a general formula for all or some nice formula for each excess? We have a function, so the generating function of before UL0, UL1 half in T that I wrote, you have a closed form. Just for excess, excess numbers. For the excess numbers, yes you can, you have a number but you don't know. So it's all about numbers at this stage, okay? But you need to know what the states themselves are because if it's just a number, you just know it's a boson or a fermion. But for example in terms of the free fermions and free bosons that I showed you before, what are they? We wanted to understand a little bit more closely the nature of these states, not apart from the fact, apart from their statistics. We wanted to know how that, so we did an explicit construction for N equals 1 and equals 2.  Catherine and I were there and we just sweated over this because I will tell you why it was complicated. But anyway, so this is because we didn't have a better idea. We really wanted to see, okay, what are these states? Not just their fermions or numbers of fermions or bosons, what are they? Okay, so we did that. Okay, so I think the time is running, isn't it? You have 12 minutes. 12, okay. So I think I'm going to skip this one but not go into the details of it. But basically at level 1, this we did a few years ago already, we noticed that all the states that are generic, okay, actually fit into representations, not of M24. I mean, this space is the same for an M24 representation but it's a representation of a maximal subgroup of M24. Now, why is this maximal subgroup of M24 so exciting to us? It's what we call G octad here, right? It's Z to the 4 semi-direct product with the alternate group of eight elements there. It's because it comes from my idea of symmetry surfing, okay? So in words, symmetry surfing is that you have a space and this is going to be the generic space of states that I'm talking about, which is common to all K3 theories, right? And then if you travel from one point in that modular space to another one, the symmetries are different. The geometric symmetries are different because you have different torii that you play with. And therefore what you do is that you collect all the symmetries at the different points, all the geometric symmetries, and therefore you obtain this G octad.  But again, I mean, it's just evidence so far and it's not proven that it's really what's going to happen in this problem, right? But at least we have this group to hook on. And it turns out that at level one, we see very clearly because we had the help of Margolin, who is a group theorist, who had written a paper ages ago about the 45-dimensional representation of M24, and the way he constructed it was very helpful in order to make this statement there. But again, I don't have the time to go into the details here. And then, apart from Keller and Zadeh that really confirmed what we expected at level one, Gabadil, Keller and Paul also did a very fine piece of group theory there, a very elegant paper, where they actually say that not only, whoops, here, okay? So not only the octad group acts on each perp, which is all you could see at level one, but they looked at all levels, and they see that the octad group act on this space, but also on all the other massive quarter BPS states here that you have at your disposal in the generic space of states, right? So again, it's evidence that the symmetry surfing idea is not dead yet, right? But again, I'm being cautious here, right? So this, I think I said one way or the other. So basically, what we did in order to get more feel is to construct the states, but we've used an extra ingredient. And the extra ingredient is to utilize the fact that in the building blocks of the Z2 or before super conformer field theories here, the building blocks also have a certain behavior and an SU2 group, like this is a global SU2, it's not, it's a global SU2, and it's actually a subgroup of the global SO4 that is common to all an equals four super conformal algebras here. And they transform as doublets under this SU2, and we've kind of implemented this refinement in the generating functions u and t that I had before. So we have introduced another complex number there, okay, to keep track of this global SU2. And what we found in doing this is that very explicitly up to here, so for one and two, so you can obviously make predictions from the analytic expressions of the generating functions that you have here. But for these two levels here, we have painstakingly computed and calculated all the states. So these 16 states here and these 28 states here explicitly in terms of the building blocks and identified the behavior under the SU2. So how do they decompose? So if I take this 16 here, how do they decompose under this SU2? And the notation here is that we have the multiplicity here, so it's two triplets here and two quintets, right? So two times three plus two times five is 16, yes, and so on and so forth. So we've done this for the three generating functions that I showed you before. And what we see is that what the excess states that we wanted to cancel here, they are six plus six, the 12th that I talked about before. Now, you had no choice at level one, I said, because there's nothing in the rest here. So this Cn is in the rest. So all the cancellations have to come from the D if you agree with me that all the Bn's are in the excess and come with a minus size. And then we have a minus two, remember it was minus two Bn. So we have minus two singlet under this SU2 and here you have two singlets in the Dn. So it seems that the SU2 behavior of the states is a guiding principle to see where the cancellations have to come from. So you see at the second level in Cn, so in the untwisted sector, you have no singlets of the SU2 that you could use to cancel twice a singlet here. On the other hand, in the Dn, you have two of these singlets, just two, just lucky and therefore you cancel them. So again, it's an observation and as you go along in the levels, it becomes a little bit more ambiguous because let's see, I think if I come to this level here for sure, we have enough in the C sector than in the untwisted sector to cancel the one there. Here you don't have enough. You would need three to the six here, yeah? Here you have enough. Okay, so even here, here you have enough, okay? So again, we have unfortunately no confirmation from proper deformation theory that our idea is absolutely correct at all levels at this time. What Keller and Zade that did for the level one now with our latest work here, we have prepared the way in order to do the same exercise at level two, but second order perturbation theory and conformity theory, yes, is technically quite involved and maybe we should have a better idea which is a little bit what I'm going to talk about next. Right, so here, right, so this is a different level of thought here, right? And it's actually, the novelty on this transparency is actually due to Catherine here in here and almost simultaneously there was a paper by Bélin Son with the mathematician who published quite a difficult paper to read but which basically arrives at the same conclusion as Catherine was published in CMP, right? So what is this? Well, I've talked a lot about the conformity theory to the elliptic genus. It's been known since Whitton and it's a book that it's actually for K3 surfaces, it's equal to the complex elliptic genus, okay? So there's a link between the geometry and the conformity theory at this level, right? And in some incarnation this elliptic genus in terms of tangent bundles and here I've taken a short curtain because we don't have the time to go into this. I can only say in words what this TLM is but it's coming from looking at first of all the basic ingredient is going to be the tangent bundle of the manifold X. So T10, right? And then there is a virtual bundle so it's a formal sum of bundles that are constructed by taking the exterior product of the T bundle so the tangent bundle times exterior product of the dual tangent bundle times the symmetric product of the tangent bundle times the symmetric product of the dual tangent bundle. So it's quite a sophisticated object but that has been studied at length in the literature and that virtual bundle that I didn't write for you here, you can recast it as an infinite sum here in two variables where L goes from 0 to infinity while M here is bounded between the dimension and minus the dimension of your manifold here and it's a formal power series in the variables Y and Q that we are familiar with and this is the holomorphic Euler characteristic of this bundle that I've constructed the way I said before. Anyway, so this is the expression and then in 2016 Kaku and Tripati had quite a good idea they said okay since the cancellations of states in the conformal field theoretic elliptic genus is a pain because we don't really see what's going on let's try to lift this cancellation and introduce a new grading which is V here in the right sector. So somehow reinstating a little bit of the partition function thing there and they did that and then they also showed that you have a counterpart in the geometry except that you can show that these two objects don't agree here they agree here they never agree right so that's the first remark and then there is much more to this that this object might not be actually that helpful in the problem at hand where we want to understand Matthew Moonshine right and then what Catherine has observed is that now instead of taking the trace just over the kernel of T bar zero right she introduces S these two a grading but she just traces over the generic states so the generic states being a subset a subspace of the curve right and the inspiration for this is that uh Kasper Kapustin and I forgot to put his name here because it was quite crucial in 2005 he had this idea that if you take the infinite volume limit of a non-linear sigma model with a topological twist then you get the homology of the chiral-derarm complex as this paper and this is exactly where we are is that you can define a new elliptic genus that she calls the Hodge chiral here which basically has to do with taking the trace over the group homology group here of the chiral-derarm complex okay now again very vaguely since I don't have time for k3 surfaces these two can be shown to agree so this is equal to this it's an invariant you can show that right and there is a structure this chiral-derarm complex is a so-called sheaf of super vertex operator algebra which have to do with the bc-beta gamma system so there is a structure of voa there for the matthew moonshine we also would like to see a voa structure on which the matthew group 24 acts okay we don't see it but we think that this chiral-derarm complex here and the sheaf homology of it are going to be a mathematical object that models the generic spaces of states in the k3 theories and if we can find more structure on it then maybe we will see m24 acting on that extra structure that that's that's a direction of travel right so I think I'm at the end here so ah I didn't tell you that yeah so that's a little remark I put it there because I knew I was going not to say it is that it turns out that if you take complex tori so t is for tori these three quantities are equal so when I say that this is not equal to this one it's it's for for tori it happens to be true but it's it's not where we want to be k3 it's not true and that's probably why at the beginning people saw that this would be the way to go for matthew munchan because I saw it word for tori but if you really calculate things for k3 then there is a differentiation there so so basically that's that's not where we concentrate our efforts just trying to understand more about the chiral-derarm complex right so this was oops okay I'll spare you the conclusion because I'm out of time I'm sure so this this is for Samson because it's his birthday now and I wanted to put something from Belgium because I'm Belgian right and like it's not clear from my name but that's what I am and in Belgium we like to say things with cartoons you know very much into cartoons and this guy called Gelluc okay Gelluc we say in French is he's also known in France by the way and he has this series of snapshots with some philosophical thoughts which you know usually are quite thought provoking which in input with a with a with a cat that's a cat yes I don't know so see that and of course he speaks French but you understand French of course yes okay so okay and there's a little message there is about saving the planet of course so we won't have 60 candles on your cake just to save the planet okay thank you yeah no it's just very general question from this very old time about 88 or something like this those suggestions of written this should be some 24-dimensional and hits the book the same time should be 24-dimensional real manifold the section of a monster such as this 24-dimension manifold should have elliptic genus which to be j function uh-huh so one get geometric realization of monster representations directly in index of deregoperator so there's really no progress after that but do people do physicists have an idea whether it should be true or not no well personally I don't I never really looked I know that I mean it's kind of expected that because m24 is a big stepping stone in constructing the monster that there should be a link a deeper link that we have not grasped yet between the monster moonshine and this one but I've not really looked at all into that direction so I know that other people working on Matthew moonshine or what I didn't say is that there are now more and more instances of moonshines where you have automorphic forms whose coefficients have to do with the dimensions of some representations of some groups yes so there are fascinating things happening but no I don't know I don't know more basically I've told you where I am and very much Matthew very much k3 for me yeah my question is it seems like you can still get quite a bit of information without knowing the conformal filtering for instance you have this space of states 192 or 100 so how can you know this without knowing what the CFDS for instance you know you remember you had this a I think was the number of bps called the bps states although you don't know so how but because the the elliptic genus is invariant over the whole space so you know that it's proof it's well you can prove that the elliptic genus is it doesn't depend on the modular at all so if you cannot compute it in any CFD because I mean you can you can't on z2 obi falls you can it's it's a special case so you can calculate the elliptic genus but if you go away from the obi four point you still have away from the obi four point no we can't compute compute anything apart we can kind of perturb a little bit and see what's happening but you knew for instance the dimension of of this h zero of whatever it was was a hundred n equal one yes so this you were able to infer nevertheless even though even away from the obi four point it seems to me yes but but we did calculate it from a no we did the calculation I did with a Gucci in 1988 was in in the framework of z2 or before the gap in the models so you calculate because it's an invariant over the whole space you can choose a point when you know how to calculate and these numbers that you are talking about are pitted out at this particular point and because you can prove it's an invariant and even if you don't know the theory you know that these will be the same numbers what you don't know is the number of excess states so the number of excess states vary from one theory to the next but in in the conformal theoretical in the CFT elliptic genus they cancel yeah are you sure the theory exists which I mean the super conformal theory which you cannot construct I mean because don't you assume it exists just to prove that just to know you're a mathematician yeah there is well the modular space is 80-dimensional that's proven mathematically right so you can't exhaust the set of theories with only the few gap no models which are isolated points and the class of z2 or before so I think what the shape is of these k3 theories nobody knows well at least I don't know I don't know maybe other people have ideas this magic numbers has lower index and can you write recursion relation no no asymptotic formulas yes sorry yes yes yes that that a Gucci and you come here I'm sure I can find a paper here if you want if you're interested yeah yes they they looked in connection with the entropy of black holes oh it's complicated but then I'm sure there are some I don't remember I had a question about this hot electric the living themes we look at this when katsu and kaku and tea party they proposed it but then we didn't know how to make sense of it because I think there was something that was not clear that it was a bps condition because indeed we want to relate it to counting of black holes where you have spin yes yes we just kind of natural yes but also we wanted to generalize the product from symmetric products because then you expect also some connection with seagull model workforce okay is there no anything because I mean this new definition that is different I mean from the it's a different object is it it's a completely different object for example it relates let me see right so that there's also several or at least one paper by a koi sick and her that they've looked quite deeply into the hot elliptic genus and they've tried they've tried to and so so they looked they looked and they found that in there there are some now now I'm getting a bit out of my depth here but there are some global section holomorphic sections that are not n equals four in there and therefore it while for the carol the ram one song this bailing song has shown that the global holomorphic sections are all n equals four only only so that's one way to differentiate the two there it's also that kapustin really points into the direction that the topologically twisted half twisted nonlinear sigma model has to do with the comology of the of the carol the the ram nothing to do with the comology of this bundle that you are talking about so it's intrinsically a new a new object you can't really calculate things in the conformer theory side because this is the state of generic the space of generic states this is really in so what has a geometric definition so that the geometric definition which agrees with the conformer theory one that's proven kapustin proves it but we need to study more looking for m24 there in in in the geometric part because I think it's quite powerful if we can find it there you saw with the z2 or before it's a bit painful yeah there was some variation of the theme uh by sham it and I think we run to change involving specials only in case yes any comment on no how does it come up set in in case three I understand no I don't I haven't read this paper I know it exists but uh there were some papers a couple years ago so yeah it came up and this m24 is replaced by something well I thought they only can realize subcruits of as I thought was the presence no it what did it algebra came it was not a joint it was in the in the g2 and speed seven is this algebra I had with wafa they used that algebra which which looks like that and constructed something I tried to read I could not understand so no I've read these ones I mean sorry next time maybe it's a good time to break for lunch thank you very much


Opening the conversation to, for real estate agents to invest because so many real estate agents don't invest like 99.9% right. And so that's a, that's a niche that I'm going after big time because it does two things for me. I, you know, I'm teaching real estate agents something they need to know pushing them into something they need to do because honestly it's the end game for agents. Ricky Caruth, how are you doing brother? What up my guy? Yeah. Super excited to have you here. We're at the wealthy investor event and Ricky is about to go out tomorrow and speak in front of a thousand wealthy investors. 1000. Are you nervous? No, no, I spoke to, this would be the biggest crowd, but I did a 800 one. Yeah. It was my event in Miami a couple of years ago and then I did 800 in Brazil. Oh, really? I was the keynote speaker at the R4 for remax in Brazil. Oh, okay. National remax conference. And it was 800 Brazilian remix agents. Oh, wow, that's crazy. They had, they had boxes. They have soundproof boxes. Have you been to like an international, no, so they have soundproof boxes with translators, translators are in the box, you know, soundproof box and they're listening in their ear to the speech and they're translated again in real time and everyone's wearing headphones.  It's nuts. And so when I went to listen to, to the Portuguese speakers, I had the headphones on listening and they were, they were translating it into English. That's crazy. And I was listening to it in real time. Yeah, that's crazy. All right, Ricky. Well, we don't have a long time, so I want to confront you. So, so I do have a real estate license, but I've noticed that the realtor culture doesn't jive with real estate investing. Anytime I talk to my old realtor buddies, they're like, man, I don't get it. Is it illegal? I don't know if it's ethical to buy houses and rentals. Are you teaching your community about real estate investing? A hundred percent. Yeah. Right. So this really this year, we just started the year, but like maybe for like the last three to six months. Yeah. I've been creating more content around investing. Yeah. But what I've been doing is, is, you know, when I do a live or I do a training session, it's all real estate agents. Yeah. So my following is real estate agents. So I'm in a coaching session. Yeah. I mean, I just did the, my 2023 kickoff session. I did all kinds of different sessions, right? And within those sessions, I'm saying, listen, I'm trying to open up the conversation in the real estate agent community about investing. So that's my big push this year is. Opening the conversation to for real estate agents to invest. Yeah. Because so many real estate agents don't invest like 99.9 percent. Right. And so that's a, that's a niche that I'm going after big time. Yeah. Because it does two things for me.  And I literally watched several agents die. Yeah.  Yeah. And they were legends and stuff. Yeah. Like I watched that happen. Yeah.  I'm like, dude, I lost a hundred thousand for two years and sacrificed everything to be where I'm at. Yeah. Like as far as on that side of it, yeah, like one out of a thousand people can go become an influencer or build a big social. Yeah. Build a business around the back end of a brand. Yeah. But everybody can go out and invest in real estate and have that long term vision for, you know, where they could end up 100%.  So that's kind of my thing on social media this year to pivot into, you know, but yeah, dude, you're paying down the debt on top of it. You're getting depreciation. You're running off and it's going to appreciate. Yep. It's a lot more than $200. My yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. They do understand it's not sexy. It's like $200 now. No, but they're not looking at what it could be long term. Yeah, 100% taking responsibility. You should take responsibility. I'm putting it on you. So I remember when I worked at my brokerage, not my personal brokerage, I worked at a brokerage in California and I told my broker manager, manager of the office. I was like, Hey, I think I want to start like flipping houses. He was like, Brian, you don't want to start flipping houses. You should just keep cold calling expireds. Keep getting listings. You know, keep doing that.  You have a buyer's agent and then you get a TC and assistant and then, you know, you'll make a great living couple hundred thousand dollars a year just doing that. And I was like, yeah, but I feel like there's more that I could do. He was like, Brian, these investors, they have like these like intricate deal comes on the MLS at the flip and and they're so fast that you're not going to like it's it's going to be hard for you to compete. Yeah. And I'm like, dude, that doesn't make sense. That's like saying that you there, there's really good agents out there and you can't compete. Yeah. Just say, well, how can I compete on expireds when there's all these agents, seven hundred agents calling them and the same thing. So yeah, it's the same thing. It's like basically saying you can't make it on social media.  No, because there's too much competition. Yeah. Right. Yeah. So that's what he was telling. Yeah. But no, listen, the thing I think the best advice is, is that. You know, everybody's different. Yeah. So it's hard to like say, here's what you should do kind of thing because everybody's different. But like the way that I did it and the way that I would, you know, it was a great path for me. Yeah. It was like I focused on my real estate agent business. Yeah. Built that to a million a year. Yeah. Like and just put everything I had into that. Yeah. Build that brand, make that million a year. Yeah. Get it up to that point. And I picked up a few properties like along the way. Yeah. But I wasn't like all in investing. I wasn't like searching for deals. Yeah. I wasn't, you know, banging away, trying to find opportunities and buy deals. I just, when I came across a deal, I would buy it. I didn't buy that many properties. I probably bought like one property a year. Yeah. Something like that. Still better than nothing. Something really small, like little houses, little duplexes and fourplexes and stuff like that. Yeah. Condos and yeah. Commercial, real small stuff. Yeah. Um, I never tried to buy anything big. I never tried to like over, you know, leverage and I never tried anything crazy. Mm hmm. Um, and like that worked out really well because it's like I picked up some properties, focused 90% of my energy on let's make a million a year. Yeah. And once I built that up to that point, it's pretty much on a very residual, um, basis because once you build your business up to that point, you're living off your database. You're not like prospecting anymore for new clients when you build up to a million a year. Mm hmm. You're pretty set as long as you're marketing to your database properly, staying in touch and all that. So then I can, you can take that prospecting time. You were prospecting, right? Still maintain the million a year over here, but then use that money and this extra time to then start trying to get more serious. Yeah. About investing. Yeah. That's the way that I did it, you know. So I never made it to make a million dollars as a real estate agent. Um, I got up to like five, 500K and, um, but I reached a point where I was like, dude, I don't want to do this anymore. Like I remember it was New Year's and, you know, the real estate community is very small, especially the, the realtor community. And on Instagram, everyone's posting like clothes, 50 deals, 14 million in transactions. Oh, this year I closed 220 deals and blah, blah, blah, blah. You know, just everyone's posting their numbers. Literally New Year's night. I remember it. I posted mine too. And then I was like, damn. So I did 50 deals. I did 50, 60 deals, something like that. And I was like, what's my goal next year? And I'm like, dude, I don't want to do a hundred deals.  I just worked every weekend. I just did 70 appraisals, 80 home inspections. I toured a hundred and some houses. Like I don't want to do that. That sucked. So that's kind of like what sparked me into getting into real estate investing. But like, what would you say to just realtor specifically who are like, they don't like what they're doing. They do it for the money. They do it because they don't like their, they don't want a job. They like the freedom, but they actually don't like their current job or they're getting burnt out. I don't know, man, cause I loved it. Yeah. I didn't have that problem. But I'm sure you've heard it before. Well, and I got to that point, right? So that's the thing. Like you love it till you don't. Yeah. Like, you know, cause I never built a real estate team. I was single agent. Yeah.  I enjoyed it. I enjoyed prospecting, showing property listing appointments and negotiating closing deals. I loved the process. So I remember Joshua Smith and I were talking and you know, he was talking to me about teams and this and that. And I was like, I'm good. I like what I'm doing. You know, like in a million, he's like, you'll love it till you don't. And I was thinking probably right. You know? Yeah. Four or five years before, like in March of last year, I was done, bro. I'd been burned out for like a year, like not loving it anymore. Yeah. But you know, that was 2021. Let's say when I started like not really feeling it. But see in 2017, that first year I made a mill, I took my prospecting time and I went and built a brand, right? So like I started, that's when I started coaching and speaking and writing and posting and creating content and all that stuff.  You built the business and go spend that focusing on trying to acquire properties and stuff. I took it and went, I was like, let me go build this brand and see what I can really do in the business world, outside of this. So like I was already to that point where like, this is like five years of creating content, like a massive brand. And I was still showing properties, right? Like I showed properties five years after I started making videos and posting and coaching and speaking and stuff. It was nuts. Still single agent, everything. Some kind of a different bird, but when it came that time where I was done, I was done. That's how I was. And so like, that's the thing. A lot of agents see it. There's the flip side. So what you're saying is I hear it a lot. One thing I hear a lot is that I love sales and see they're gonna love it till they don't. And the thing is, the thing is, is that, that if they start buying properties now years before it gets to that point, right? Instead of waiting till you're at the point where you're, you're, you're burnout to start buying properties. Yep. You know, that's the problem is because it takes a long time for these properties to really turn into, you know, that, that end of the rainbow situation.  And that takes time to build that portfolio. You can just start and build that portfolio in a year. So I don't know, man. Like agents that just think they love sales forever, they're the ones that really need to be bought because the people that really love it, they're hitting it hard. And if you're hitting it hard, you're going to get burnout. 100%, right? Yeah. Yeah, I don't know. You can't be a warrior forever. No, no, but some people do. Like some people did, I've seen people do it. Some people do, but not like, first of all, I don't want to do it. Like, you know, some, at some point. So let me, let me, let me go back a little bit. What I'm super grateful that I became a realtor. I am super grateful because before that, I worked at Pizza Hut, I worked at Sonic, I worked at like stupid jobs. I was going to college for sociology. I wanted to help people that had like, had personality disorders and stuff like that. I actually used to work and get paid by medic, Medicaid, Medicare, Medicaid, whatever it is. I used to work with the children that had personality disorders. I would spend a couple hours with them, teach them like basic like listening skills, you know, how to create tasks, like just basic things to keep them functional in society. And I was making nothing, like nothing. Like maybe, let's say I get to work with a kid for the state said it had to be two hours, max four hours at a time. So I go work with a kid, maybe the parent had two hours. Okay, I made $20. Then I would have to go drive to another kid, work there for two hours.  Oh, guess what? The kid is like, hey, I'm hungry. My mom didn't feed me today. Cause these are not like, you know, I'm like in the hood helping these kids out. I'm like, damn, okay, I'll take you to Jack in a Box. All right, that was $14 right there. That's, I just worked for free pretty much. That's what I was doing before I became a real estate agent. So I met a buddy. He was like, yeah, you know, I make 60 K as a realtor. I was like, dude, I'll do that. Went to the class to become a realtor. I remember my teacher said, you can make $100,000 as a realtor.  And I only gotta sell like 12 houses. That's one house a month.  So I am super grateful that I started it. But I think realtors, like I said, they get trapped in this little bubble. It's created by the social media that they watch, the Mike Ferries, those type of people.  I was like, why are people selling houses by owner? Why are they doing that? Oh, I don't know. You need a house. You need a realtor to sell your house. So it's kind of illegal.  Like the whole culture like breeds you to stay in the office, make your cold calls, do the open houses. So it is a great way to start in real estate, but it's not like you should be a realtor for the rest of your life and never own real estate. I just don't agree with that mindset. Hey, it's Ricky. I hate to interrupt this podcast, but really quickly, I wanted to share with you a way that you can create content exactly like me. I'm posting so much content, so much quality content, and that content is helping me build multi-million dollar businesses. If you're having trouble creating content, coming up with the ideas, filming, editing, all that stuff, I wanna help you with every bit of it. All you have to do is go to wealthycreator.io backslash Ricky. So again, that's wealthycreator.io backslash Ricky to set a call up with my team today so that you can get started creating content exactly like me and turning those views into real clients. Now back to the show. It's not an in-game. Yeah, no, it's a start. Yeah, yeah.  That was my start, but the thing was, dude, as I grew up roofing houses and I wanted to make a million dollars and I saw the path with it, you know what I'm saying? So like, it depends on like, everybody's different, but like, I could visualize, I could visualize that path. I do like, when I, so like, I got in in 2002, right? I made a mill before I'm 23. I lose it all in the crash, flipping houses.   Right, right, and like, I'm not like, so I flip like a house a month right now, but I pay cash for houses. My backup plan is if a house doesn't sell or if I don't wanna sell it for a loss or something, I can rent that out and take equity out, right? That pays that debt, that the rent pays the debt and go use that money somewhere else. If I leverage and then I get in trouble, I could, you know, I'm bleeding, right? Never gonna do that again, but I put debt on all my long-term stuff, but I lost that mill and everything, right? They took my house, my car, everything. And I was sleeping in a car my friend gave me and I was sleeping on people's couches, eating out of people's refrigerators and stuff like that. And when I came back, it was 2008, when I got back in the real estate, because I was roofing houses, working on an oil rig, got laid off from the oil rig in 2008 and went back into real estate, right? Dude, I didn't even realize that the stock market crashed in 2008. No. Had no clue, no clue, right? Because I was so focused on this right here, right? Making my calls, building my relationships, closing my deals, like properties were half price. It was like, blend the streets, dude, it was easy. It was so easy, man. It was like, who wants a property for half price? Me, everybody wanted a property for half price, dude. It wasn't hard for me to go out, like 2008, I crushed it, I made twice as much as I made the year before on the oil rig, then I made more money every year since. But like, I was so focused on like that, and I could see, I could visualize the path from A to B and million dollars. Dude, I didn't even know what was going on, like around me or anything. I had no idea about stock market crash. I didn't even, like I got on, I got on, what was the one before Facebook? MySpace. MySpace, yeah. Right, I went on MySpace, I had a MySpace account, like an O5 or something, right? And it kind of went away. You know what I mean? Pretty quick.  So after that first MySpace experience, like I just kind of disregarded social media. You know what I mean? So like when I came back in, I was just focused on one thing, build this business to a million dollars. And I didn't care or even know or even think about nothing else. It's focused on one thing. I didn't think about social, I didn't think about stocks, nothing. Yeah, that was it. That's how focused you have to be. But like when somebody sees the path to get somewhere, you have to focus that hard. 100%. You know what I'm saying? To get there. But I knew that once I got there, then I could parlay that into whatever. That's what I did. The first year I made a million, I started, I looked around, I was like, oh, social is a thing. Yeah. Okay, let me go crush this then. It's such a thing. Yeah. And that kind of led, you know, one thing led to another. But yeah, dude, I didn't even know what was going on. I was like that too. When I was a realtor, I was so focused that I remember I would tell people at the office, I'm like, can you just turn the music off? Like the people playing music, I'm like, can we just turn it off? Can we just work?  I'm like, bro, why? Why? Yeah. I'm like so locked in. Like people are like, oh, the nights are playing. I'm like, who cares? Being real successful in real estate, super lonely. It is. It is. I worked at their office every day. Me too. COVID. Yeah. I was an office guy. Me too. I still am. And I was in there by myself. Like I had my own little office and stuff. I'm in there by myself, right? We had a 50 office, like a 50 room building. Yeah. You know, with different offices, 50 different offices. Yeah. There was like three or four that were actually being used by people. Yeah. It's everywhere across the country. It looks like that. The agents that, you know, like most agents are just doing it kind of just. Yeah. They're not really like, treating it like a real like nine to five. My second broker told me he was like, if you treat real estate like a job, it'll be the best paying job you ever had. 100%. And so like, I look at agents right now that are getting out of the business because a lot of them are getting out of the business right now.  I gotta go to a job. I'm gonna go to bills and stuff. And I'm like, okay, cool.  Yeah. They're like, yeah. I was like, okay. And how, like, are you making calls? Like, how, what have you been doing for the past two weeks to try to build your real estate business?  I'm gonna find out, they're spending like three or four hours or so on their business. I'm sure. Right? Yep.  Yeah. And you wouldn't even spend more than three hours a week on your own business. Yep. And so like I'm trying to tell agents right now because so many agents got in during COVID. Yeah. And now they're leaving the business because they didn't sell anything or whatever, but they haven't spent any time trying to build their business. Nope. And I'm like, work like it's somebody else's business. Yep.  People don't treat real estate like it's a job. Nope. Right? Nope. And that's one of the big problems. I grew up roofing houses, working from sun up to sun down, dude, I served tables, concierge, you know, landscape, framing, painting, cook pizzas, cook in a restaurant, seafood cook, all kinds of stuff.  But I was always, I've always been a worker. Yeah. If I lost a job or something, I was working the next day. Yeah. I got in a fist fight with my dad one time over a tape measure, I put it in the wrong bucket and the next day he couldn't find it. I was like, what's this right here? And we got in a fight like a fist fight. Yeah. And I was like, all right, dude, I'm home, walked home, called another roofer, hopped on a roof of that day, roofing houses. Like I don't, there's no downtime. Yeah. Like I'm doing something. Yeah. You know what I mean? But most people aren't. No, they're not like that. You know what I'm saying? But I don't, I don't get that. See, that's the thing. I don't, I'm not, I don't. Everyone can be like that, obviously. But I don't, but you're doing something. Yeah. Right? I don't, I don't relate. I don't, it's hard for me to relate. Yeah. That's just me. Yeah, I get it. Yeah. So I used to be like that, like I said, I used to be extreme focused. Like I remember I would, it sounds stupid, but I would like, if let's just say I wanted to be out the office at eight and I opened my door to get to my car at 730, I'm like literally running to my car. Like, and I caught myself doing that. I'm like, what am I doing? Like, why am I running to my car to get to the office at eight? There's nobody waiting for me. I'm just going to be there by myself. Right. Like the Superbowl of whatever year. I remember I was at the office, cold calling. And then I set an appointment with an expired listing cause nobody was calling expired. So went on the listing appointment, got the listing, came back to the office. I got a new Zillow lead, took the lead out, went out, showed houses, came back to the office, was writing offers during the Superbowl. And I was like, damn, like I guess the lump, the level of competition in realtors is so low that it's hilarious to me. I would be like, I'm in the office, cold calling. I got Mojo on, I'm dialing, I'm like watching people. I see the guy show up at eight or nine, maybe 10, work on his little computer, he'll stand up, he'll go get some coffee, then he'll go chat with the other guy and then his best friend comes in, they come in and then they're running comps and then they go to lunch for an hour and then they come back and then maybe they do something and I'm trying to hit 50 contacts by 12 p.m. And I'm like, bro, this is like easy. It's so easy, but I know you can't, like for me, I realized that like you can't be like super on all the time because you'll burn everything around you. I learned that from Kobe Bryant. I never met him, but he had a video. He's like, there's a reason why God created the sun and the moon because if the sun was up all the time, it would kill all the vegetation and there wouldn't be life on here.  I don't give a, you know, but I can't be like that. You can't be like that all the time. You'll push people away. So now I try to find a balance of like focus and a part of me that like will go do stuff. Like very last story. I remember my friend, one of my good friends, he's my barber, his name's Charlie. He's like, dude, let's go watch Fast and the Furious. And I'm so hard at this moment. I'm like, dude, what?  Like what is there? It ain't nothing there for me. But I was like, I was like, let me just go. So I go and then there was more people there that I wasn't aware we're gonna be there and they're all like joking around. And then we watched a movie, we have a good time and we go out and I'm like, you know, work is good, but there is life that I don't wanna miss working all the time. Right, right, right. So that's the part that I've always struggled with is like balancing, but yeah. Yeah, I mean, there was a lot of times when I was in the middle of trying to build my business that I didn't work out at all. Me too. Right, just like so focused. And then when my business was doing good, you know, that kind of a little breathing room I would get back in the gym. Yeah. You know, and I'm working out again. So we go through phases with this, you know. I know exactly what you're talking about and it's a big, big problem. So like I worked 15 hours a day for 15 years. Yeah. Right, on real estate. Yeah. Right, because we didn't have like Mojo and Red X and stuff. Yeah. I couldn't just push a button and find a thousand numbers. I had to look them up individually. I'd be in pasting addresses and stuff, right? Yeah, yeah. I would spend all night looking up 100 and then the whole day and the next day hand dialing them. Yeah, I used to hand dial. So I'd do like nine to three. It took me to like hand all 100 numbers. Yeah. And then I would hand write 20 letters every day and I would start looking up numbers and it would take me hours to look up all the numbers I wanted to call the next day. Yeah.  But like now there's a lot of things. Number one, for me, like I'm to a place where I can knock off at five every day and on the weekends and chill, chill with the family and stuff. But for like new agents and people that are still building and grinding and stuff, you've got the technology and everything. Yeah. Like it took me 15 hours to call 100 numbers. I know. Okay? Yeah. Like you can literally do that with a click and then auto dial takes an hour and a half, right? Yeah, yeah. Hour and a half. So like you can do what Ricky did in a 15 hour day and an hour and a half. Could do it faster now, for sure. Be done by 10 o'clock with a Ricky day when he was building his business and still have your entire like half the morning and day after lunch. You could literally build your business in a way if you took advantage of, you know, the technology and communication. You could literally, even as a new agent, be in a position where you don't really work after five unless you're showing property, right? Unless you're going to a listing appointment showing property or something. I was always on call, you know, if somebody wanted to see a property or listing appointment or write an offer or something, I mean, I was there. I don't care if it was midnight, weekends or whatever. You know, and I love doing it, dude. Like writing an offer and during the Super Bowl, I did that a couple of times. Yeah. And I'm thinking in the back of my head, dude, man, I grew up roofing houses for like $200 a week. You know, I'm like, I'm going to make 25 grand. Like I'm writing this offer, like I'm counting the money. Yeah. I'm like, this is 25 Gs right here. Yeah. I'm just like, you know, I don't know, dude, everybody's different, comes from different backgrounds. It's all kind of what you want out of life. You know what I mean? Yeah. But like being a full-time flipper, for me, it's risky if that's your main source of income because you lose money on a house. 100%. If you're taking money from other people, you could lose their money. Yep.  Right? I mean, you know, for me, like the only reason I flip houses now is because I have two other partners that love doing it. Yeah. And I want to maintain those relationships. It's the only reason. Yep. Honestly, it's the, if it were me, I would buy the same houses we're buying and just keep them. Yep. Right?  If we would have kept 30 of those of the best ones, kept them and rented them out, we would be, our net worths would be so much more. 100%. We would have so much cash flow coming in. But instead, we flipped it for 20 grand a piece or whatever we made, we'll pay taxes on it and stuff like that. You know, it's not the smartest business move. No. In my opinion. No.     He just likes it. Yeah. He's actually, he actually fixes the houses up too for us. Down. You know, he just likes it then. He's a farmer. He's just like a retired farmer and just wants something to do. Yeah. Has too much money. Yeah. So we teach people at Walty Investor to do all ways of investing. So it's not just flipping, flipping, wholesaling, Airbnb. And there's a reason why, because you can't just flip every house. You'll run out of capital. You'll put yourself in too much debt. You'll, you'll, you'll hurt yourself if you only know how to do one aspect. But last two topics I want to talk to you about. Number one, we'll talk about leadership. So the mission of Walty Investor is to build leaders in rich communities. That's what the Walty Investor is for. It's not get rich quick. It's not buy Rolex on Lambo. It's build leaders in rich communities. How do you become a better leader? Hmm. I don't think everybody's built to be a leader. I disagree. Yeah. I think everyone could, could be a leader. Everyone is a leader. Uh-huh. Let's say my wife. My wife doesn't work. Is she not a leader? Yeah. Um, that's, I mean, good point when you think about it like that. Exactly. I'm thinking about it. Okay. So you're thinking about it in terms of life in general. Exactly. Kids. Yeah. Church. Right. People that, you know, leading by example. Yep. More than being a leader of a large group of people and organizing and inspiring and all that stuff. Yeah. So it's two different things. Yeah. So as far as being a leader of a large organization, inspiring, motivating. Yeah. Organizing and stuff like that. Yeah. Not everybody. That is a very, that's a rare breed. Yeah. Yeah.  Absolutely. Even if you're, you know, leading the wrong, down the wrong path, you're still leading in some form or another. I think being a great leader really comes down to kind of thinking about, you know, what your core values they are and what you want out of life, right? And what the, like, because the speaker the other day, yesterday at the workshop, Gary, I think it was Gary that was talking about anything past 90 days was more of inspiration. Yeah. Right. You know, when you're making goals and anything under 90 days is kind of like that short term now. Yeah. You know, the operations, the metrics and everything else, how we're going to get to the longterm vision. Yeah. And leading by example has, I think that's a good way to think about leadership is like, what's the inspiration longterm of what you want, you know, people to remember you for and what you want your kids to be like and stuff like that. Yeah. And then breaking it down to what those daily habits are, you know, to accomplish how you want people to remember you and view you for. One of my buddies just died, spoke at his funeral, one of the most incredible dudes. I mean, he had the gift of, this dude, this dude was something, man. He could talk to anyone. He was very intelligent and everything else, but so many people showed up to his funeral and talked about how great of a person he was and how great he made everybody feel and how special he made everybody feel and stuff like that. I think it comes down to that, right? Being dependable and going out of your way to make people feel special. 100%. You know what I mean? 100%. People remember that. That's what I'm working on now, because like I said, like if you're so hard, you're probably not treating people special. So that is something that I'm working on myself. If you're freaking hard all the time and you're like trying to work and, you know, squeeze every minute. You're so focused on the goal. Yeah. That you're just single goal. Yeah. You're just pushing people aside. That's tough. And it's such a catch 22 because you got to hit the goal. You have to succeed and like success, the catch 22 is you're trying to succeed at the highest level for your family. Yeah. Right? But then to put her, you know, you have to put enough into that to hit the goal, but putting so much yet where do you, you know, there's that little thin gray area of being able to put in enough, but then still be present where you're not pushing them. Yeah. Your family aside. Yeah. That is, that is a, that's a game, bro. That is a game. So focus on making people feel special is a great leadership quality. Last question. So like I said, the wealthy investor is, so people live a wealthy lifestyle. So that's wealthy in money, wealthy in love with your family, wealthy in your relationship with Christ or whatever your religion is, and wealthy in health. So how do you make sure that you're living the wealthy way? I think you have to take time for yourself, right? And reflect a lot. What does that mean? Well, a lot of people don't, I mean, a lot of people meditate. Yeah. Where you find clarity. You know, I don't so much meditate in the traditional sense, but I think having that time with yourself to kind of reflect about what's happening in all of those categories. Yeah. In all of those health categories is super important to like take a step back and take a break and visualize, you know, like how you feel. Yeah. Where you stand in all of those categories and where can you get better? Where are you lacking? And stuff like that. The way I do it is, you know, I go to the gym every day, six o'clock with my father, Monday through Saturday and like that's kind of like my time. Yeah. Right? And that's where I get a lot of clarity. Yeah. It's kind of like the phone isn't ringing. You know, I have time to really kind of think about stuff. I spend time with my dad and I can kind of reflect on what else happened. Like, am I pushing people aside? Am I being too much into this over here? Right? Do I need to ease back here and put more here? Yeah. I think self-reflection is key, honestly, to living that wealthy lifestyle you're talking about. You know, I think that's a big step in it, right? And then taking what you see and making adjustments along the way because it's a journey. It's like you're constantly tweaking and changing, right? There's no such thing as like, I've got it. No. Nothing. No. You think you got it? And then something we'll show you. Yeah, as soon as you have it, you do have it. Yeah. Well, all right, brother. Well, this was the Wealthy Investor podcast. We are out. Peace. Thank you so much for watching this podcast. I hope you got tons of value out of it. I'm going to put the next episode right here so you can continue watching and continue crushing. Keep selling and keep building, and we'll see you guys on the next video, which is right here.