Exploring Relativity and Field Theory in Intermediate Level Textbook

  • Context: Relativity 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Orodruin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sr Textbook
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
Sign up Log in
19 replies · 3K views
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
2025 Award
Messages
22,832
Reaction score
14,876
I am reshaping my course on special relativity (master level intermediate relativity course, I am getting it back after having the GR course instead for a number of years) and I find myself wanting to include two things:

- A more geometrical approach to Minkowski space.
- Basic classical relativistic field theory in Lagrangian form. Essentially discussing the restrictions arising from requiring the Lagrangian density to be a Lorentz scalar and the resulting implications for scalar and vector fields (essentially the classical KG field and electromagnetism).

I have some trouble finding a good textbook, particularly when it comes to the second requirement. Does anyone know of any good choices?

Edit: It won't hurt if it also includes introductory GR as many students will be taking both courses.

@vanhees71 @robphy @PeroK (or anyone else)
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: Wrichik Basu and berkeman
Physics news on Phys.org
Orodruin said:
I am reshaping my course on special relativity (master level intermediate relativity course, I am getting it back after having the GR course instead for a number of years) and I find myself wanting to include two things:

- A more geometrical approach to Minkowski space.
- Basic classical relativistic field theory in Lagrangian form. Essentially discussing the restrictions arising from requiring the Lagrangian density to be a Lorentz scalar and the resulting implications for scalar and vector fields (essentially the classical KG field and electromagnetism).

I have some trouble finding a good textbook, particularly when it comes to the second requirement. Does anyone know of any good choices?

Edit: It won't hurt if it also includes introductory GR as many students will be taking both courses.

@vanhees71 @robphy @PeroK (or anyone else)
Concerning classical relativistic field theory, I like

D. E. Soper, Classical field theory, Dover Publications, Minneola, New York (2008).

dealing with (ideal) fluid dynamics, elastics, and (in-medium) electrodynamics, everything based on the action principle (Lagrangian).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby, Orodruin and malawi_glenn
This set of books by Andrew Steane ( https://users.physics.ox.ac.uk/~Steane/ ) might be something of possible interest:
https://global.oup.com/academic/search?q=steane

I haven't looked at these in detail

Relativity Made Relatively Easy: vol 1 and vol 2
https://www.amazon.com/dp/019966286X/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0192893548/?tag=pfamazon01-20Also possibly interesting (based on their tables of contents):
Relativity Matters by Johann Rafelski
https://www.amazon.com/dp/3319512307/?tag=pfamazon01-20

Core Principles of Special and General Relativity
by James Luscombe
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1138542946/?tag=pfamazon01-20
 
malawi_glenn said:
Maybe Joe Minahans lecture notes would work https://www.physics.uu.se/digitalAssets/405/c_405910-l_3-k_specrel.pdf
IIRC it does not treat KG, but tensors, EM and Lagrangians.
(I used them when I took his relativity course about 15y ago)
Fun fact: I sat in the same PhD grading committee as Joe this past spring. We both questioned the respondent’s claim that there are no Weyl fermions in the standard model …

vanhees71 said:
D. E. Soper, Classical field theory, Dover Publications, Minneola, New York (2008).
This is so cheap I had to order it on the spot.

Will look into the rest of the suggestions also of course.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: malawi_glenn
Orodruin said:
We both questioned the respondent’s claim that there are no Weyl fermions in the standard model …
What kind of fermions did the respondent think were in the SM? :o
 
robphy said:
This set of books by Andrew Steane ( https://users.physics.ox.ac.uk/~Steane/ ) might be something of possible interest:
https://global.oup.com/academic/search?q=steane

I haven't looked at these in detail

Relativity Made Relatively Easy: vol 1 and vol 2
https://www.amazon.com/dp/019966286X/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0192893548/?tag=pfamazon01-20Also possibly interesting (based on their tables of contents):
Relativity Matters by Johann Rafelski
https://www.amazon.com/dp/3319512307/?tag=pfamazon01-20

Core Principles of Special and General Relativity
by James Luscombe
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1138542946/?tag=pfamazon01-20
Be careful with Rafelsky's book...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: malawi_glenn and Vanadium 50
Orodruin said:
- A more geometrical approach to Minkowski space.
- Basic classical relativistic field theory in Lagrangian form. Essentially discussing the restrictions arising from requiring the Lagrangian density to be a Lorentz scalar and the resulting implications for scalar and vector fields (essentially the classical KG field and electromagnetism).
Probably too abstract and/or too advanced and/or too detailed, but the book "Special Relativity in General Frames" by Eric Gourgoulhon has some really nice geometrical stuff.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: The Bill, Orodruin and vanhees71
George Jones said:
Probably too abstract and/or too advanced and/or too detailed, but the book "Special Relativity in General Frames" by Eric Gourgoulhon has some really nice geometrical stuff.
This looks quite promising. It is very extensive at about 800 pages, probably too much for my 1/4 semester course, but it turns out my university has a Springer subscription so it should be available to the students for free in electronic form, which is a big plus.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SolarisOne and vanhees71
Orodruin said:
[...](master level intermediate relativity course, [...]

- A more geometrical approach to Minkowski space.
Since the course is "master level", have you considered abandoning the light postulate? :oldbiggrin:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Orodruin said:
It is very extensive at about 800 pages, probably too much for my 1/4 semester course

robphy said:
Are you saying that your course is a short course lasting 0.25 semesters?
(Maybe I am misunderstanding "1/4 semester".)
If so, here 1/4 semester would be nine 50-minute lectures, or about 89 pages per lecture!
 
robphy said:
Are you saying that your course is a short course lasting 0.25 semesters?
(Maybe I am misunderstanding "1/4 semester".)
It runs over half a semester, but the credits correspond to 1/4 of the semester so typically students take several courses at the same time.

I have 12 90-minute lectures.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
vanhees71 said:
Be careful with Rafelsky's book...
Can you explicitly state the reason for this?

Vanadium 50 said:
I have not looked at Rafelsky, but agree with @vanhees71 . Johann Rafelsky has an..um...unique way of looking at things. That may be agood, It may not be.
Is it possible for you to expound on your statement?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Daverz
A blurb from the back cover of Rafelski's book:

Rafelski presents Special Relativity in a language deemed accessible to students without any topical preparation - avoiding the burden of geometry, tensor calculus, and space-time symmetries – and yet advancing in highly contemporary context all the way to research frontiers.​

That's unusual...
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz, berkeman and shinobi20