"Must-read" papers in general relativity

[ergospherical]

I found an interesting list of "must-read" papers in the field of general relativity compiled by Emanuele Berti:
https://pages.jh.edu/eberti2/posts/must-read-paper-list/

Are there any notable exceptions, or other "classic" papers that - in your view - every relativist ought to have read?

 

[TeethWhitener]

Fulling's 1973 Phys. Rev. D paper:
https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2850
It preceded and anticipated the Hawking/Unruh radiation papers. Namely, it showed, in language that even I can understand, that the QFT vacuum is not preserved under arbitrary coordinate transformations, even in flat spacetime. In other words, an inertial observer and an accelerated observer in flat spacetime will not agree on the vacuum.

 

[Demystifier]

I found an interesting list of "must-read" papers in the field of general relativity compiled by Emanuele Berti:
https://pages.jh.edu/eberti2/posts/must-read-paper-list/

I would bet that Berti is the only guy on the planet who read them all.

 

[Demystifier]

W.G. Unruh, Experimental black-hole evaporation?
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.46.1351

This paper demystified GR by showing that counterintuitive notions of curved spacetime, black hole and Hawking radiation are in fact very much analogous to something much more mundane, that can even be prepared in the laboratory.

 

[martinbn]

Interesting, he has put one of his papers on that list too.

The list doesn't have any papers by Penrose, nor Geroch. I would say that quite a few of their papers should be on a list like that. Also more Hawking papers.

 

[Demystifier]

Interesting, he has put one of his papers on that list too.

The list doesn't have any papers by Penrose, nor Geroch. I would say that quite a few of their papers should be on a list like that. Also more Hawking papers.

Yeah, the list says more about him than about what everybody must read.

 

[Demystifier]

R. Geroch, What is a singularity in general relativity?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0003491668901449

Explains why the notion of singularity is defined the way it is defined through a socratic dialogue.

 

[robphy]

I found an interesting list of "must-read" papers in the field of general relativity compiled by Emanuele Berti:
https://pages.jh.edu/eberti2/posts/must-read-paper-list/

font-emphasis mine...

Must-read paper list...
a selection of classic/well written/interesting papers
for our weekly group meetings this coming Spring.

Are there any notable exceptions, or other "classic" papers that - in your view - every relativist ought to have read?

Techniques in Differential Topology in Relativity
Roger Penrose
https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611970609

 

[Demystifier]

Techniques in Differential Topology in Relativity
Roger Penrose
https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611970609

Would you call it a book or a review paper?

 

[ergospherical]

Techniques in Differential Topology in Relativity
Roger Penrose
https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611970609

This is nice, the topological aspects of GR is a subject I haven't touched much/at all because I haven't taken a maths course on topology yet, but this looks very readable

 

[robphy]

Would you call it a book or a review paper?

Lecture notes.

These notes by Lerner of Penrose’s conference lectures helped form Penrose’s “Techniques…”
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-05793-5_1
(Part of
Methods of Local and Global Differential Geometry in General Relativity
Proceedings of the Regional Conference on Relativity held at the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, July 13–17, 1970.)