<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Three-Dimensional Gravity Revisited · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0706.3359/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0706.3359/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Three-Dimensional Gravity Revisited — mentioned by donovanr</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9889674</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:0706.3359:9889674</guid><pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2015 04:12:22 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Massless GR is sometimes called &amp;quot;pure gravity&amp;quot;, and is something people are still interested in (or were, last time I was paying attention) [1]. Kind of remarkable that even the base-case has so many open issues. I should re-read that Torretti book, I remember liking his style but that some of the math was over my head at the time. [1] http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.3359&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0706.3359/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>hep-th</category></item></channel></rss>
