Should i take differential geometry?

ia_
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Should I take a semester-long differential geometry course (in lieu of a thermo/stat mech course, which while not terribly challenging would prepare me for qualifiers, etc), or should I just jump into GR and maybe pick up a mathematical methods in physics course later? I first learned partial dif eqs in an advanced e&m course, will differential geometry and general relativity be a similar deal, or do I really need a solid foundation in it before starting?

To be more clear: I'm a grad student, differential geometry and thermo/stat mech are both mixed undergrad/grad courses. Thermo/stat mech is probably similar in content to a mixed undergrad/grad course I took a few years ago as an undergrad. I'm sure taking it again as a grad student would improve my stat mech, but I'm also a little hesitant to go through it with undergrads forcing us to cover everything I've already done before. On the other hand, I'm somewhat worried that either 1. differential geometry could turn into a time consuming exercise in mathematics that won't really be used ever again or 2. I will end up kind of screwed by not taking it. I will sit in on differential geometry tomorrow and see what I think of it.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I'd recommend taking the differential geometry class. It was by far the best math class i took as part of my mathematics degree. The way it was tought made me really know linear algebra, topology as well as some analysis. As for jumping into GR it could be done, but the math is difficult and taking differential geometry would make it easier and give you a better understanding of where a lot of the math comes from.
 
dmoravec said:
i took as part of my mathematics degree.
I think the answer to the original question is whether you want to go on in the math or the physics of GR.
 
I'm not clear whether you're an undergrad or a grad student. I wouldn't take an elective math course in lieu of a core physics course like thermal physics, unless you mean you can pick it up another semester before graduating.

A GR course will introduce the necessary Riemannian geometry, but usually makes a beeline to the Riemann tensor, and doesn't have much time to develop geometric intuition. The usual undergraduate differential geometry course covers local and global theory of curves and surfaces in 3 dimensions, and maybe generalizes that to manifolds in n-dimensions if there's time. That will give you a lot of insight and intuition you might not get otherwise, but it's not absolutely necessary for doing well in GR. Maybe you can audit the course.
 
ia_ said:
Should I take a semester-long differential geometry course (in lieu of a thermo/stat mech course, which while not terribly challenging would prepare me for qualifiers, etc), or should I just jump into GR and maybe pick up a mathematical methods in physics course later? I first learned partial dif eqs in an advanced e&m course, will differential geometry and general relativity be a similar deal, or do I really need a solid foundation in it before starting?
i think that if the geometry course (in lieu) will prepare you for the qualifiers and that is what you need then i think you should take it.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top