Topology Introduction to Topological Manifolds by John Lee (prereqs)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the feasibility of studying a graduate-level mathematics text with a background in applied mathematics, despite some gaps in knowledge of specific theorems and definitions. Participants confirm that it is possible to study the book while looking up necessary details, as it is largely self-contained and includes an appendix with prerequisite material. The book is praised for its clear presentation and motivation for the theory, although it is noted that it is not easy. Suggestions for pacing self-study emphasize balancing time commitment with other academic responsibilities, highlighting that consistent daily effort is essential for retention. Comparisons are made to the difficulty of other texts, such as real analysis, and inquiries are made about the time required to complete the book and its relevance to understanding physics involving manifolds.
FallenApple
Messages
564
Reaction score
61
I'm interested in this subject. This is a graduate text and I believe the prereqs are mostly a math degree, which I somewhat have(B.S in Applied Math from a few years back). The thing is, I forgot details about things. For example, I know how to do an epsilon delta proof and can read one when presented, but I don't remember the particular theorems/definitions( uniform convergence, ratiotests etc), I remember the philosophy behind a vector space/subspace of linear algebra, but I don't remember all the details of factorizations of matricies, all the theorems etc.

Is it possible to study this book while just looking up the needed details on the side as I go along?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, it is definitely possible. I read much of this book and worked through a considerable portion of the problems before finishing my physics degree. It is pretty self contained, it even has an appendix with some prereq. results from set theory, metric spaces and group theory. The presentation of the material in the book is also really very good, it provides a lot of motivation for the theory.
 
  • Like
Likes FallenApple
FallenApple said:
I'm interested in this subject. This is a graduate text and I believe the prereqs are mostly a math degree, which I somewhat have(B.S in Applied Math from a few years back). The thing is, I forgot details about things. For example, I know how to do an epsilon delta proof and can read one when presented, but I don't remember the particular theorems/definitions( uniform convergence, ratiotests etc), I remember the philosophy behind a vector space/subspace of linear algebra, but I don't remember all the details of factorizations of matricies, all the theorems etc.

Is it possible to study this book while just looking up the needed details on the side as I go along?

Don't worry, you're fine. The book is extremely good, and the best thing is that it requires very very little prereqs. I have guided multiple people through this excellent book, most of which never had any formal proof-based math courses. Everything you need is detailed in the appendix which you should read first and should be pretty well-known to you. Don't make a mistake though, the book is not easy, it just has very little prereqs.
 
  • Like
Likes FallenApple
micromass said:
Don't worry, you're fine. The book is extremely good, and the best thing is that it requires very very little prereqs. I have guided multiple people through this excellent book, most of which never had any formal proof-based math courses. Everything you need is detailed in the appendix which you should read first and should be pretty well-known to you. Don't make a mistake though, the book is not easy, it just has very little prereqs.

Thanks. Do you have any suggestions on how I should pace myself? This is mostly for casual self study.

I don't want to put so much time that wouldn't be able to work/study other subjects. But at the same time, putting in very little daily time really wouldn't make it stick.

How hard is this compared to say, real analysis on the level of Ross?
 
Cruz Martinez said:
Yes, it is definitely possible. I read much of this book and worked through a considerable portion of the problems before finishing my physics degree. It is pretty self contained, it even has an appendix with some prereq. results from set theory, metric spaces and group theory. The presentation of the material in the book is also really very good, it provides a lot of motivation for the theory.

Thanks for the input. How much time did take you to get through the book? Was it helpful for understanding physics that uses manifolds?
 
The book is fascinating. If your education includes a typical math degree curriculum, with Lebesgue integration, functional analysis, etc, it teaches QFT with only a passing acquaintance of ordinary QM you would get at HS. However, I would read Lenny Susskind's book on QM first. Purchased a copy straight away, but it will not arrive until the end of December; however, Scribd has a PDF I am now studying. The first part introduces distribution theory (and other related concepts), which...
I've gone through the Standard turbulence textbooks such as Pope's Turbulent Flows and Wilcox' Turbulent modelling for CFD which mostly Covers RANS and the closure models. I want to jump more into DNS but most of the work i've been able to come across is too "practical" and not much explanation of the theory behind it. I wonder if there is a book that takes a theoretical approach to Turbulence starting from the full Navier Stokes Equations and developing from there, instead of jumping from...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • Poll Poll
Replies
10
Views
8K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Back
Top