The best book to start with String Theory

[Sleuth]

Hi everybody,
i'm a phd student in theoretical particle physics... so for my studies I'm learning a lot about qcd and phenomenology, but don't know anything at all about string theory etc...

Even though I'm quite skeptical about string theory and the not so many prediction it gave, still i would like to have a deeper idea of it before judging :)

do you have any suggestion on a very good and complete book for beginners? :)

thank you so much

SLeuth

 

[negru]

Well the classic choices are
Green, Schwarz, Witten: Superstring theory
Becker, Becker, Schwarz: String Theory and M-Theory: A Modern Introduction
Polchinski: String Theory.

My personal favorite is BBS. Polchinski has all the details, but I never liked how that book is organized. Also BBS sort of jumps right into the fun parts a bit faster.

 

[Spinnor]

The quality to cost ratio is high for, The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe by Roger Penrose.

Available at Amazon for 14.90$ new and 10.60$ used. See;

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0679776311/?tag=pfamazon01-20

From one of the reviews,

It's a delicate balance for book: Encyclopedic vs well focused on a unifying theme!

Penrose succeeds admirably. It's not boring! Books like this are few and far between. Indeed, there are preciously few authors who manage to successfully guide beginning students into serious scientific topics; and even fewer who can see the big picture, and do it all. And then keeping our attention through more than 1000 pages! Penrose's book is inspiring, informative, exciting; and at the same time it's honest about what math and physics are. It is modest when modesty is called for. You are not cheated. You do get the equations (not just hand waving!), but you are gently prepared in advance, so you will want the mathematical formulae. Penrose's book is likely to help high school students getting started in science; and to inspire and inform us all. There is something for everyone: for the beginning student in math or in physics, for the educated layman/woman (perhaps the students' parents), for graduate students, for teachers, for scientists, for researchers; and the list goes on.
It is one of the very few books of this scope that is not intimidating. Not in the least!
I can't begin to do justice to this terrific book. Get it, and judge for yourself. I will also not give away the ending, other than saying that the title of the book is a good hint. And you will be able to form your own take, and your own ideas on the conclusion. Like with all good and subtle endings, they can be understood and appreciated at several levels.

I came across Penrose's book in my bookstore by accident, and I was at first apprehensive: The more than 1000 pages, and the 3.3 pounds are enough to intimidate anyone. But when I started to read, I found myself unable to put it down. And I didn't: Bought it; and I had several days of enjoyable reading. I am not likely to put it away to collect dust either. It is the kind of book you will want to keep using, and to return to.

It will not surprise that one of Penrose's unifying themes is the compelling and pleasing geometric images that underlie both the mathematics (roughly one third of the book: modern geometry, Riemann surfaces, complex functions, Fourier analysis, visions of infinity), and the physics: Cosmology (the big bang, black holes), gravity, thermodynamics, relativity (classical and modern: loop quantum gravity, twisters), and quantum theory (wave-particle duality, atomic spectra, coherence, measurements).

The pictures: In fact, this semester, I was just teaching a graduate course, and I had a hard time presenting of Riemann surfaces in an attractive way. It's a subject that typically comes across as intimidating in many of the classical books: Take Herman Weyl's book, for example. I also found it refreshing to see that Roger Penrose gave the many illustrations his own personal and artistic touch; as opposed to having flashy pictures generated by the latest in color-graphics and special effects. I think readers will relate better to Penrose's own illustrations: They isolate and highlight the core ideas and they are not intimidating: We sense that we ourselves would have been able to make similar pencil sketches. Or at least we are encouraged to try!

The common theme in the pictures serves to bring to life the underlying and fundamental ideas;--- another attractive feature of the book! It is otherwise easy to get lost in some of the equations, and in the encyclopedic panorama of topics. Review by Palle Jorgensen, February 2005.

 

[Demystifier]

Well the classic choices are
Green, Schwarz, Witten: Superstring theory
Becker, Becker, Schwarz: String Theory and M-Theory: A Modern Introduction
Polchinski: String Theory.

My personal favorite is BBS. Polchinski has all the details, but I never liked how that book is organized. Also BBS sort of jumps right into the fun parts a bit faster.

These are classics, but for a BEGINNER, the best choice is
B. Zwiebach, A First Course in String Theory

Concerning advanced textbooks, am I the only guy who likes
M. Kaku, Introduction to Superstrings and M-theory ?

 

[haushofer]

I would start out with the lecture notes by David Tong, supplemented by GSW. GSW is outdated, but still very good! For the CFT-part I would recommend DiFrancesco et. al., for the mathematics Nakahara.

 

[haushofer]

Zwiebach is very good, but also very lengthy. I worked through the whole first part a few years ago, but that takes a lot of time. As a PhD student I wouldn't recommend that. If you know basis differential geometry and QFT, GSW is the best choice I would say.

The BBS-book somehow I don't really like that much; too often I get the feeling that without a background in String Theory the book is hard to follow. I expected more from that book. But maybe I should give it another try. I guess the real successor of GSW still has to come.

 

[IRobot]

I'm also looking for a string theory book for beginner, would you recommend "String Theory in a nutshell" by kiritsis ? I heard it is a bit rough for a first approach of the subject

 

[crackjack]

A word of caution: You will almost never be able to read enough of string theory (while working on your phd in a different area) to be able to pass a sound judgment. This is because of the sheer volume of literature, and also because it is still quite far from being fully developed.

As for a light, semi-technical book, I would suggest "String theory Demystified" by David McMahon. Zwiebach is also a nice first read.

 

[hitmeoff]

These are classics, but for a BEGINNER, the best choice is
B. Zwiebach, A First Course in String Theory

Concerning advanced textbooks, am I the only guy who likes
M. Kaku, Introduction to Superstrings and M-theory ?

What would be the prereqs for getting something out of the Zwiebach book? I am looking to do a reading course on string theory sometime in the next few semesters. I am a junior/senior math and physics major and I am current doing group theory, analysis and classical mechanics. In the winter I will be doing rings and fields, the second quarter or classical mechanics and analysis and the first part of E and M. I MAY also do modern geometry (not diff geo, which I know would be helpful, but I think Modern Geo would be helpful).

In the spring I do anticipate starting the QM series and plan to take a GR class next fall. Should I wait to complete the QM series and take that GR class before I attempt a reading course for Zwiebach? I MIGHT also be doing a Lie Algebra reading course sometime between now and next winter (when I hope to be done with the QM series). Should I wait till I have some Lie Algebra experience as well?

 

[George Jones]

From Zwiebach's preface: "A First Course in String Theory should be accessible to anyone who has been exposed to special relativity, basic quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, and introductory statistical physics. Some familiarity with Lagrangian mechanics is useful but not indispensable."

 

[Demystifier]

In the spring I do anticipate starting the QM series and plan to take a GR class next fall. Should I wait to complete the QM series and take that GR class before I attempt a reading course for Zwiebach?

Yes, especially QM.

I MIGHT also be doing a Lie Algebra reading course sometime between now and next winter (when I hope to be done with the QM series). Should I wait till I have some Lie Algebra experience as well?

No.

 

[Sleuth]

Hi everybody :)
thank you so much for all the answers...

i'm quite familiar with qft, in particular i worked on qed for my master thesis and now working on perturbative qcd for my phd project.

If i got it right, the best to start should be Green Schwartz Witten, right?

I'm curious, and as someone who works in phenomenology, i will probably never been satisfied ehehe...
but i still think, as far as i know, that string theory has an intrinsic mathematical beauty, and very differently from 99.9% of the phenomenologists, i do believe that it could still hide some clues or hints to understand the universe a little better, and so i think it's still worth the effort of studying it :)

thank u sooooo much

Sleuth