>
> http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=762#comment-42541
>
> http://www.fqxi.org/large-grants/awardee/details/2008/baez says,
>
> "Dr. John Baez
> University of California at Riverside
>
> Project Title:
> Categorifying Fundamental Physics
>
> Summary:
> In ordinary mathematics, and physics as well, equations are
> fundamental. However, every equation is a half-truth: after all, if
> the two sides of the equation look different, why are we saying
> they're the same? 'Categorification' is a fancy name for coming clean
> on this issue: instead of merely saying that two things are the same,
> we specify a way of regarding them as the same.
> ...

> http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=762#comment-42541
>
> http://www.fqxi.org/large-grants/awardee/details/2008/baez says,
>
> "Dr. John Baez
> University of California at Riverside
>
> Project Title:
> Categorifying Fundamental Physics
>
> Summary:
> In ordinary mathematics, and physics as well, equations are
> fundamental. However, every equation is a half-truth: after all, if
> the two sides of the equation look different, why are we saying
> they're the same? 'Categorification' is a fancy name for coming clean
> on this issue: instead of merely saying that two things are the same,
> we specify a way of regarding them as the same.
>
> This has surprising consequences. For example, we usually think of ...

>http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=762#comment-42541
>
>http://www.fqxi.org/large-grants/awardee/details/2008/baez says,
>
>"Dr. John Baez
>University of California at Riverside
>
>Project...

> ahahaha... I love it. Dr. John Baez of UC Riverside, who loves to
> point out that he regularly flies to conferences around the world
> (he's a proud jet-setting physicist), is the well-known usenet
> crackpot and math puzzle fanatic who once wrote this wonderful gem:
>
>    I would prefer to say that there are infinitely many "nows", but no
>    one "now" that is any better than the rest.  In special or general
>    relativity, we can define a "now" to be a spacelike hypersurface -
>    or more technically, a Cauchy surface.  In one "now", I am typing
>    this article while sitting at my desk on a hot summer morning in
>    Riverside. In another, I am asleep on an airplane flying to
>    Portugal.  In most of them, I don't exist.  Since we can describe
>    the state of the universe by giving the values of fields at any
>    given "now", all these "nows" give isomorphic descriptions of the
>    universe.  The isomorphism between them is what we call "the
>    passage of time".
>
> ahahaha... Wait, it gets even better. In response to the following
> mesmerizing nugget of wisdom by fellow crackpot, Mark William Hopkins: ...

> http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=762#comment-42541
>
> http://www.fqxi.org/large-grants/awardee/details/2008/baez says,
>
> "Dr. John Baez
> University of California at Riverside
>
> Project Title:
> Categorifying Fundamental Physics
>
> Summary:
> In ordinary mathematics, and physics as well, equations are
> fundamental. However, every equation is a half-truth: after all, if
> the two sides of the equation look different, why are we saying
> they're the same? 'Categorification' is a fancy name for coming clean
> on this issue: instead of merely saying that two things are the same,
> we specify a way of regarding them as the same.
>
> This has surprising consequences. For example, we usually think of ...

>On Aug 10, 12:25 am, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:

>> ahahaha... I love it. Dr. John Baez of UC Riverside, who loves to
>> point out that he regularly flies to conferences around the world...

>
>"Traveler" nowhere.net> wrote in message
>news:fs4s94tanser1fms7tac6o14i0kkje1060@4ax.com...
>| On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 13:40:44 -0700 (PDT), postdoc4ever@gmail.com wrote:
>|
>| >http://www...