 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Copied from Talk:Lorentz covariance: NPOV for Loop Quantum Gravity section
I am convinced that such a (misleading) discussion of LQG, one particular theory that has problems with Lorentz covariance, much like with many other requirements, does not belong to the page about such an important topic as Lorentz invariance. It's not just my opinion, see also Prof. Sean Carroll, [1]. All the best, Lubos -- Lumidek 11:46, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- I whole heartedly agree. Can we move this material to a separate article (or merge it into the Loop quantum gravity article)? -- Fropuff 15:16, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- It came from loop quantum gravity, a while back, when that needed concision. I suggest a separate page for the issue. Charles Matthews 16:02, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I have added a Notability tag because (a) the article is incomprehensible to non-experts, (b) it has no references. Biscuittin ( talk) 18:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
|
| This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Copied from Talk:Lorentz covariance: NPOV for Loop Quantum Gravity section
I am convinced that such a (misleading) discussion of LQG, one particular theory that has problems with Lorentz covariance, much like with many other requirements, does not belong to the page about such an important topic as Lorentz invariance. It's not just my opinion, see also Prof. Sean Carroll, [1]. All the best, Lubos -- Lumidek 11:46, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- I whole heartedly agree. Can we move this material to a separate article (or merge it into the Loop quantum gravity article)? -- Fropuff 15:16, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- It came from loop quantum gravity, a while back, when that needed concision. I suggest a separate page for the issue. Charles Matthews 16:02, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I have added a Notability tag because (a) the article is incomprehensible to non-experts, (b) it has no references. Biscuittin ( talk) 18:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)