LQG is explained in his book Not Even Wrong where he points out that loops are a perfectly logical and self-consistent duality of the curvature of spacetime: ‘In loop quantum gravity, the basic idea is to use the standard methods of quantum theory, but to change the choice of fundamental variables that one is working with. It is well known among mathematicians that an alternative to thinking about geometry in terms of curvature fields at each point in a space is to instead think about the holonomy [whole rule] around loops in the space.’

LQG has the benefits of unifying Standard Model (Yang-Mills) quantum field theory with the verified non-landscape end of general relativity (curvature) without making a host of uncheckable extradimensional speculations. It is more economical with hype than string theory because the physical basis may be found in the Yang-Mills picture of exchange radiation. Fermions (non-integer spin particles) in the standard model don’t have intrinsic masses (masses vary with velocity for example), but their masses are due to their association with massive bosons having integer spin. Exchange of gauge boson radiations between these massive bosons gives the loops of LQG. If string theorists had any rationality they would take such facts as at least a serious alternative to string!

Dr Woit’s focus isn’t a complaint about the failure of string to accomplish checkable physics but is a complaint about the continuing hype and the underhanded attacking by string theorists at alternatives in general despite the hypocrisy that this involves! He makes it clear that he does not see string theory as wrong, only that so far it has only produced hype, hype, hype, plus extra loud hype when someone complains about alternatives being unheard.

Of course, he might see things from quite a different perspective if he was censored from posting papers to arXiv.org and so on. As it is, he can delete my embittered comments about string damaging physics as being mere noise.

“I think Peter Woit should start criticizing LQG too, only to be fair to “not even wrong” theories by his standard.”

I guess he won’t. A while ago some of his readers had the brilliant
idea of setting up a FAQ on his site. Great, I thought, let’s start
with proposing some questions, and came up with:
“What is the most overhyped theory of quantum gravity?”

He immediately deleted my post. I guess because he knew the answer ….

The review itself and some comments also express the craftmens view on this book (there is no argue for string theory _or_ loop).

For my opinion Lees objectives were different ones:

I think he took string theory as a current example for doing science the wrong way.

I agree with him totally that the current physics community is a kind of church and I think too that no relevant theory was born after the 1930ies. Thats a result of the dominating craftsmen in the physics community.

Frank.

You’ll never believe what the correct theory is! Unfortunately, I am unable to publish it.