- #1
andytoh
- 359
- 3
I know I posted a similar question before but it was moved to the Academic and Career Guidance section and so I got answers from many non-relativists who answered no because they weren't into theoretical physics.
So let me be more specific here. Would someone specializing in general relativity become better at general relativity if he studied the proofs of mathematical theorems that are used in general relativity? Some example mathematical theorems from Wald's General Relativity Book are:
-The Heine-Borel Theorem
-Frobenius' Theorem
-Noether's Theorem
-Paracompactness leads to the existence of partition of unity
-Hausdorff and Second Countable = paracompact
-{d/dx^1,...,d/dx^n} forms a basis for the tangent space Tp(M)
and the list goes on.
Would you say that studying the proofs of these theorems would make you better at general relativity? Being better at math means being better at general relativity right? Or is your time better off spent simply learning how to use them as tools for general relativity and not bother reading the proofs?
So let me be more specific here. Would someone specializing in general relativity become better at general relativity if he studied the proofs of mathematical theorems that are used in general relativity? Some example mathematical theorems from Wald's General Relativity Book are:
-The Heine-Borel Theorem
-Frobenius' Theorem
-Noether's Theorem
-Paracompactness leads to the existence of partition of unity
-Hausdorff and Second Countable = paracompact
-{d/dx^1,...,d/dx^n} forms a basis for the tangent space Tp(M)
and the list goes on.
Would you say that studying the proofs of these theorems would make you better at general relativity? Being better at math means being better at general relativity right? Or is your time better off spent simply learning how to use them as tools for general relativity and not bother reading the proofs?
Last edited: