Relationship between GR and qm+electromagnetism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter romsofia
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gr Relationship
AI Thread Summary
Understanding general relativity (GR) requires a solid grasp of the mathematics involved in electromagnetism (E&M), even though GR itself does not heavily rely on E&M concepts. The professor emphasizes the need for advanced undergraduate knowledge in electromagnetism, special relativity, and quantum mechanics for his gravitational theory class. While the student is progressing through "Classical Electrodynamics" by Jackson and a PDE course, they question if this preparation is sufficient. Mastery of E&M mathematics is crucial for comprehending GR, suggesting that further study may be necessary to meet the course requirements. Ultimately, a strong mathematical foundation in E&M will enhance the understanding of GR concepts.
romsofia
Gold Member
Messages
599
Reaction score
330
I emailed a prof about sitting in on his graduate-level gravitational theory class next semester. He said he would like his students to have understanding of electromagnetism, special relativity and quantum mechanics at the advanced undergraduate level.

This is the course description: Presents Einstein's relativistic theory of gravitation from geometric viewpoint; gives applications to astrophysical problems (gravitational waves, stellar collapse, etc.).


My question is does GR involves the two subjects? I have the QM down, but I'm not sure if my electromagnetism is at the "advanced undergraduate level" and am not sure if I'll have enough time to bring it up to par if GR needs my understanding to be there.

Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
GR doesn't involve much E&M, but if you are not facile with the mathematics of E&M, you will not understand a whit of GR.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
GR doesn't involve much E&M, but if you are not facile with the mathematics of E&M, you will not understand a whit of GR.

What level of math is E&M at?

I have "Classical Electrodynamics: Third Edition" by Jackson, and am slowly working through the first chapter. But so far, all I've seen are divergence theorems and things of that sort.
I'm also currently taking a PDE course (Initial/Boundary value problems for first-order, wave, heat and Laplace Equations; maximum principles; Fourier Series and applications.).

Would that be enough? If not, what would you suggest I also study?
 
Ideally, you should be able to handle any problem in Jackson. (Although not necessarily quickly!)
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.
Back
Top