John Baez's quantum gravity

[AntonioLao]

the home site for John Baez is

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/

his paper relating strings, loops, knots and gauge fields is

http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/hep-th/...09/9309067.pdf

[dleviwing]

Antonio;
I like this part of his web better.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
Seriously though, it is a good site to add to the favorites category.
Thanks;
Dave

[AntonioLao]

Dave,

I see you also have unearth this crackpot index. As for me, I hate to apply this index to my own independent research for i might be forced to abandon all my efforts.

Antonio

[Guille]

Antonio;
I like this part of his web better.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
Seriously though, it is a good site to add to the favorites category.
Thanks;
Dave

I enjoyed reading the list. Althought it's strange, there were less points for claiming to ber better than Einstein than for claiming to be better than galileo or newton.

[dleviwing]

I enjoyed reading the list. Althought it's strange, there were less points for claiming to ber better than Einstein than for claiming to be better than galileo or newton.

Guille;
Galileo and Newton were much better than Einstein and thus worth more points.
You should check out the FAQ section also; there is some good info there.
By the way; Welcome back. I expect to see a "Trip Report" posted soon.

[Guille]

Guille;
Galileo and Newton were much better than Einstein and thus worth more points.
You should check out the FAQ section also; there is some good info there.
By the way; Welcome back. I expect to see a "Trip Report" posted soon.

What do you have to defend that Newton and Galileo were better than Einstein?

I will post a "Member Saga" thread. But many of the ideas that I have will be post in several threads I will start as soon as I n¡finish answering all the threads and posts I have still to check.