Sounds like you know quite a bit about this field. Would you mind if I PM you for a bit of a reading list?

Also, I was thinking I would probably use KhanAcademy pretty extensively to catch up on the basic maths/physics I missed and then trying to find as much supplementary material free from the various Open Course Ware sites that academic institutions have peppered the internet with.

The timescale I'm aiming at is probably six months to a year with a lot of extra stuff, which is why I went with "study group" instead of "book club". Its not just a read through and discussion (at least for me, the others can give as much or as little time/effort as they want to).

Do you think this sounds sufficient to get a sense of what is going on in each of the subjects? I'm not looking to get a BSc in Physics, just trying to get a proper look in on Physics and hopefully pick up some of the maths in the process.

Sure ask away (pm or here) and if i can help sure. Let me know what are some examples of books you have read in Math and Physics or classes you have taken. Nothing wrong with having an ambitious plan even if it proves too much for just 6 months, it will certainly prove ok for 18 or even more and still leave you with something that lasts a lifetime and if the book even without totally reading it gave you this , well thats the benefit. I have literally hundreds of books at home bought over the years week after week right now and you can be sure i have a lot of them that have read only up to 20% or something. It takes a lifetime really...

Also illegal or not if you plan to buy the books anyway or later in life or whatever you already have them and want access in laptops etc, the usenet newsgroups on technical ebooks have almost all these books i referenced and the Penrose one too. However out of respect for the authors its wise to find a way to reward them for their work in the books you like and find useful. In times of crisis however nobody can argue that learning is a crime if you do it for the good of mankind as clearly any study in theoretical physics has to be to make sense anyway, either because one becomes eventually a contributor on their own or develop a rich understanding that allows them to be a constructive citizen of the planet.

I think it's very difficult to find people who learn at the same pace / understand each other. but sure open a skype group, find a time to meet each week.

This is my major concern.

Btw, I have just finished my degree in maths so i kind of want to research stuff (namely Fourier analysis) on my own for a while. I don't want to commit to this group as of yet, but I may go along with it anyway. Can I join later on? Or is it "you're either in or your out?"

Aside, if anyone has any questions, feel free to pm me.

Edit: Functional Analysis, not Fourier Analysis.

I don't see why not.

I have this book and had a lot of trouble reading it, during senior year in a chemical engineering program. (had Diff Equation experience etc).

I strongly suggest Feynman's Lectures on Physics to learn a lot of interesting things instead of doing math homework for hours a day for months. But maybe FLoP is too "Dumbed Down" for this forum? I've read so many great things about it I recently started reading it in my recreational time.

The Feynman lectures aren't dumbed down at all - in fact, I think they're a great example of another massive work that gets taken on by people who aren't really prepared for it by virtue of its reputation. (That applies less to this crowd, who probably could get a lot out of the Feynman lectures if they cared to.) What Road to Reality offers in principle is something different - much of what it gets into once it starts talking about physics is not discussed in the Feynman lectures at all. I'd imagine the appeal of "OMG LOOP QUANTUM GRAVITY" drives a lot of the interest in Road.

EDIT: And I'd consider signing on for a functional analysis study group at some point, although the next few months probably aren't so great for me on that front. I started reading Kolmogorov and Fomin a while ago and was enjoying it but got distracted from that project.

Why do you say that? He only dedicates 1 chapter to LQG. [edit] I figured if anything it would be for Penrose's own twistor theory.

I've only met Penrose in passing, but I got the feeling he was pretty bitter over the whole twistor saga.

What is the 'twistor saga'?

Also, dissertation is taking longer than expected to get a handle on so probably not free to get started next Wednesday. But that is the absolute latest since thats when I have to hand it in. Anyone who wants can probs start reading the first few chapters, make notes on what they would like discussed, hunt for supplementary stuff etc...

I met him a couple times and he seemed to be open to loops but I thought he was still working on twistors. He wasn't working on loops as far as I knew. What's the twistor saga?

Well saga might have been overstating it. Penrose came up with twistors in the 70s and was super exited about them and tried to get people into them...but nobody really cared. Then Witten wrote a paper on twistors in 2003 and suddenly the whole world was interested in them.

Bitter was prob a stretch as well....I just remember being at a dinner with him and some other people and another grad student asked him something about twistors (this was around 06) and he made a joke about how now suddenly everybody wants to talk about twistors when he's been trying to talk about them for 30 years.

Ah yeah that makes sense.