"""I think a little background on the author is in order. I am a physicist, and think like a physicist. The proofs and theorems given here are what I would call ``physicist'' proofs and theorems, which is to say that while the proofs may not be rigorous, they are practical, and the theorems are intended to give physical insight. It would be great to have a mathematician work on this to give patch theory better formalized foundations."""
Which translates to: you know what, we both know this is all pretty much correct and if you think you need to spend a couple more hours (or days) setting down the mathematical foundations in excruciating detail be my guest, but I'd rather read a thousand papers on string theory.
I mean, I pretty much agree. After all, I studied computer science. We make physicists look pretty rigorous.