Math Prerequisites for Field Theory Course: Wald's Text

  • Thread starter Thread starter kostas230
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Prerequisites
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical prerequisites for studying General Relativity using Wald's text and the necessary background in differential geometry and topology. Participants explore which mathematical concepts and texts are essential or beneficial for understanding the material in Wald's book.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a strong background in mathematics and seeks recommendations for additional texts on differential geometry to prepare for Wald's Field Theory course.
  • Another participant argues that extensive prior study of differential geometry is not necessary, suggesting that the math in Wald primarily involves abstract index tensor calculus and that practice with Wald's problems is more beneficial than reading a separate math text.
  • It is noted that only a specific chapter in Wald requires significant topology knowledge, particularly regarding global causal structure.
  • Several book recommendations are provided for those interested in further mathematical study, including critiques of Munkres' book on algebraic topology.
  • A question is raised about the necessity of reading "Introduction to Topological Manifolds" before "Introduction to Smooth Manifolds," which leads to a discussion on the sufficiency of prior knowledge in basic topological concepts.
  • Some participants suggest that familiarity with certain topological notions is adequate for progressing to smooth manifolds, while also mentioning that Lee's text contains valuable counter-examples.
  • There is a mention of the need for some algebraic topology concepts in Lee's smooth manifolds book, particularly regarding covering spaces and fundamental groups.
  • One participant humorously notes that the prerequisites can be daunting, referencing a quote by Paul Halmos about prerequisites.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of studying differential geometry before tackling Wald's text. While some argue that it is not essential, others suggest that certain mathematical concepts are beneficial. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the extent of mathematical preparation required.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about prior knowledge in topology and algebraic topology are present, but the discussion does not resolve the specific mathematical prerequisites needed for Wald's text.

kostas230
Messages
96
Reaction score
3
I'm a 3rd year major in physics. I have a very strong background in linear algebra and rigorous calculus, and I'm studying topology from Munkre's book and abstract algebra from Fraleigh. Next year, I'm taking a graduate course called "Field Theory" which covers General Relativity, using Wald's text and QFT using Weinberg's books and some others.

Can you recommend me what books on math (diff geometry for example) should I read for tackling Wald? Thank you. :)

Edit: I accidentally posted it in academic guidance, instead of textbooks' section. So, if an admin can transfer it to the correct section that would be good. :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't really need to do that before starting Wald for a number of reasons. For starters, the majority of the math in Wald consists of abstract index tensor calculus/algebra (take a look at chapters 7, 9, and 10 for example) so only by doing the problems in Wald's book, in this context that is, will you ever get practice with that-a math book on differential geometry won't help with that in the slightest. Secondly, a lot of the concepts you learn from a typical differential geometry text won't show up in Wald's book. The only chapter that even requires much topology is the chapter on global causal structure of space-times. But if you still want, there are a good number of awesome books out there.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0387954481/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0387983228/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0125267401/?tag=pfamazon01-20

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0387979263/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0387901485/?tag=pfamazon01-20

As a side note, don't use Munkres' book beyond the point set topology half because the algebraic topology half is just plain terrible in that book.

EDIT: Also, if you want a GR book that is much more rigorous mathematically than Wald, check out: https://www.amazon.com/dp/9400754094/?tag=pfamazon01-20
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Can't thank you enough WannabeNewton. :)

One question though. Do I have to read Introduction to Topological Manifolds before going on to Introduction to Smooth Manifolds?
 
Not really, not if you already know basic topological notions such as connectedness/path connectedness, compactness, local compactness, quotient spaces (particularly adjunction spaces), first/second countability, and stuff like that. Munkres would have covered all of that. Still you can skim through Lee's text on topological manifolds if you want because the end of chapter problems contain some really cool counter-examples (line with infinitely many origins, the long line etc.).
 
Fromm a book by mathematician Paul Halmos:

“…[the reader] should not be discouraged, if on first reading of section 0, he finds that he does not have the prerequisites for reading the prerequisites.”
 
Unless you are reading GR xD
 
WannabeNewton said:
Not really, not if you already know basic topological notions such as connectedness/path connectedness, compactness, local compactness, quotient spaces (particularly adjunction spaces), first/second countability, and stuff like that. Munkres would have covered all of that. Still you can skim through Lee's text on topological manifolds if you want because the end of chapter problems contain some really cool counter-examples (line with infinitely many origins, the long line etc.).

Lee does need some algebraic topology occasionally though. For example, covering spaces and fundamental groups are sometimes needed in his smooth manifolds book. And if you want to read up on De Rham cohomology, it's best to know a bit of singular homology already.

Not that you can't read smooth manifold without these, since if you only know point-set topology you can still follow 99% of his text.

I do seem to recall that Wald sometimes needs simply connectedness and stuff...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K