Nope. I do not know him. I like wolframphysics.com as my alternative. I'm a computational cognitive neuroscientist so I like Wolfram's overdetermined computational approach to physics. I'm also with Einstein, Maxwell, Newton, Descartes, and others who thinks all this formal stuff are just frameworks for reasoning in specialized analogies. And I believe we should be more accepting of analogies that make more cognitive sense just for the sake of demystifying the more formal logical frameworks limited by empirical observation. But physicists should respect natural language analogies and be more careful when they try to verbally describe their mathematical descriptions of an underlying reality that may never be computationally understood by human brains. We know how human brains compute and can see the limitations. Foremost is that without such things as math our brains cannot discover some accurate descriptions of reality.

Here is how your brain computes:

https://medium.com/liecatcher/how-your-brain-computes-41ebe7428ff9