- 22,170
- 3,327
- Author: Bernard Schutz
- Title: A First Course in General Relativity
- Amazon Link: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521887054/?tag=pfamazon01-20
- Prerequisities:
Last edited by a moderator:
Bernard Schutz's "A First Course in General Relativity" is recognized as one of the most accessible introductions to general relativity (GR), particularly for those comfortable with non-rigorous mathematics. The book excels in its treatment of special relativity and tensors but deliberately avoids in-depth discussions of differential geometry. For readers seeking a more rigorous approach, alternative texts such as Wald's "General Relativity" or Carroll's works are recommended. The discussion emphasizes the importance of foundational knowledge in special relativity for effective comprehension of GR.
PREREQUISITESThis discussion is beneficial for undergraduate physics students, aspiring physicists, and anyone interested in gaining a solid foundation in general relativity and its mathematical underpinnings.
This seems to be true of many *undergraduate* GR texts. They all seem to take this "physics first" standpoint which may work for some undergraduate students but me personally I cannot stand all the hand waving. If you are just coming out of your first intermediate mechanics class then this book or Hartle will probably do you justice but if you have already learned smooth manifolds (I have looked at spivak's volume 1 and the problems are brutal compared to the ones in Lee haha) then this kind of book would probably move too slowly in terms of the mathematics. In that case Wald is probably a *considerably* better choice (or Carroll but like you I think Wald is better because he is more precise with the math). The thing is though, books like Wald tend to focus on the math SO much that the down to Earth physics gets totally lost and for things like that a book like this would be pretty good (like I said the chapters on gravitational waves and the one on interior solutions for stars). Anyways if the person wanting to start GR feels he/she is not ready to do a graduate level text but finds the math in the typical US undergraduate texts like Hartle move too slow I still hold strong that the book by Hughston and Tod works well to bridge the gap but it assumes prior knowledge of SR (this book is used for undergraduate applied math majors at Oxford). By the way Fredrik have you checked out the book on SR by Rindler. IMO that book is the best out there for SR; it covers things like Thomas Precession which Schutz doesn't.Fredrik said:This book has a reputation for being the easiest (or at least one of the easiest) introductions to GR, and it probably is. But the reason it's easy is that it does everything it can to avoid differential geometry...
So the book has an excellent treatment of tensors outside of the context of differential geometry, but a (deliberately) very weak presentation of differential geometry.
I have not. I mean, I know I've had a quick look inside it at some point, but I don't even remember what I thought at the time.WannabeNewton said:By the way Fredrik have you checked out the book on SR by Rindler. IMO that book is the best out there for SR; it covers things like Thomas Precession which Schutz doesn't.