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.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

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?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Should a General Relativitist Study Math Proofs?

Loading...

Similar Threads for Should General Relativitist | Date |
---|---|

I Radiation of matter "free falling" into the black hole | Apr 17, 2018 |

B Why should spacetime/manifold be smooth? | Mar 5, 2017 |

I Should Einstein's Field Equations be modified for cosmology? | Sep 6, 2016 |

How should I think about null geodesics? | Jul 10, 2015 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**