Suggestions for future reading — Supergravity by Freedman or A First Course in String Theory by Zweibach?

In summary, the conversation is about a person seeking recommendations on what to read first between Supergravity by Freedman and A First Course in String Theory by Zwiebach. The person has read books on QFT and is interested in eventually learning about M- and F-theory. The recommendations include "The Tools for Supersymmetry" by Prof. van Proeyen and the person ultimately decides to read Jim Gates' book on SUSY. There is also a discussion about the difficulty of certain string theory books and the importance of patience in learning.
  • #1
MathematicalPhysicist
Gold Member
4,699
372
What do you recommend to read first, Supergravity by Freedman or A First Course in String Theory by Zweibach?
For future consideration.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
dextercioby said:
What is your goal?
Eventually I would like to find out if possible what are M- and F-theory.
I did finish reading the books by Peskin and Schroeder and Srednicki a few years ago on QFT and last year in November I finished reading Schutz's textbook; so I think I have the perquisites for both.

I thought of reading after I'll finish reading Muller's book on pQCD, the book by Zweibach.
But now I am not so sure, so if someone read both books and had done the exercises, what do you recommend to read first?

Thanks.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #4
It is Zwiebach, not Zweibach. I didn't go through his book in detail, but I thought he was gentle on a very difficult topic. A book going deep in SuGra is one thing, a book going midway into Strings is another. You needn't deep know-how in SuGra to understand everything there is to know of strings. So I would simply let you choose one direction.
Here's my list of recommendations (that book and some lecture notes) with a common name (former I presume) prof. van Proeyen from KUL. "The tools for supersymmetry" is a must (it should be somehow still contained in the intro to his SuGra book).
 

Attachments

  • Capture.JPG
    Capture.JPG
    33.2 KB · Views: 116
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and berkeman
  • #5
dextercioby said:
It is Zwiebach, not Zweibach. I didn't go through his book in detail, but I thought he was gentle on a very difficult topic. A book going deep in SuGra is one thing, a book going midway into Strings is another. You needn't deep know-how in SuGra to understand everything there is to know of strings. So I would simply let you choose one direction.
Here's my list of recommendations (that book and some lecture notes) with a common name (former I presume) prof. van Proeyen from KUL. "The tools for supersymmetry" is a must (it should be somehow still contained in the intro to his SuGra book).
To tell you the truth I never get it correct words with i and e together, also friend receive etc.
I was sure it was Zweibach... thanks for the correction.
It's a pity there's no auto-correction for last names.
 
  • #6
MathematicalPhysicist said:
To tell you the truth I never get it correct words with i and e together, also friend receive etc.
I was sure it was Zweibach... thanks for the correction.
It's a pity there's no auto-correction for last names.
That is a very small (albeit helpful) part of his reply. What did you think about the rest of his reply? :wink:
 
  • #7
berkeman said:
That is a very small (albeit helpful) part of his reply. What did you think about the rest of his reply? :wink:
I guess I'll try Zwiebach (is it now correct?) first.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Demystifier
  • #8
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Eventually I would like to find out if possible what are M- and F-theory.
Then start with Zwiebach.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #9
SUGRA is a topic on its own. If you're interested in strings, then I'd start with Zwiebach, but be aware that other string texts have much, much steeper learning curves.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Demystifier
  • #10
haushofer said:
SUGRA is a topic on its own. If you're interested in strings, then I'd start with Zwiebach, but be aware that other string texts have much, much steeper learning curves.
Do you refer to GWS and Polichinski's? yes they are on my list of reading after Zweibach, First GWS and then Polichinski's.

But not in the near future that's for sure.
Patience is a virtue...
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #11
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Do you refer to GWS and Polichinski's? yes they are on my list of reading after Zweibach, First GWS and then Polichinski's.

But not in the near future that's for sure.
Patience is a virtue...
For example. I used GSW with Tong's notes, which are excellent. GSW contains no CFT, which is covered by Tong in a compact and concise way. I never understood what people like about Polchinski.
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier and dextercioby
  • #12
haushofer said:
GSW contains no CFT
My first reaction was that it cannot be true, but then I checked and realized that you are essentially right.
 
  • #13
Theres CFT iin the Di Frachneskk and it mat tale quute a long time tead them at alkm i.e Di Frachenso er al monumental book.
 
  • #14
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Theres CFT iin the Di Frachneskk and it mat tale quute a long time tead them at alkm i.e Di Frachenso er al monumental book.
Are you tired, drunk or just in a hurry? :oldbiggrin:
 
  • #15
All of the above...:-
Demystifier said:
Are you tired, drunk or just in a hurry? :oldbiggrin:
Why not both?! it's not mutually exclusive.
 
  • Haha
Likes Demystifier
  • #16
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Why not both?! it's not mutually exclusive.
Why do you think he exluded that option?! He said "or" not "xor".
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
  • #17
martinbn said:
Why do you think he exluded that option?! He said "or" not "xor".
Or maybe Xor when the "or" has disjoint disjuncts.
 
  • #18
MathematicalPhysicist said:
All of the above...:-

Why not both?! it's not mutually exclusive.
I was more tired as I haven't slept for a few weeks, from too work and studying.
I wish there was more easy and enjoying work like in academic work...
I haven't drunk alcohol, don't like it anyways.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
  • #19
  • Like
Likes vanhees71

Related to Suggestions for future reading — Supergravity by Freedman or A First Course in String Theory by Zweibach?

1. What is the difference between Supergravity and String Theory?

Supergravity and String Theory are both theories that attempt to unify the fundamental forces of nature. However, Supergravity is a classical theory that describes gravity as a supersymmetric extension of Einstein's theory of general relativity, while String Theory is a quantum theory that describes gravity as the result of tiny strings vibrating in multiple dimensions.

2. Which book is better for beginners, Supergravity or A First Course in String Theory?

Both Supergravity by Freedman and A First Course in String Theory by Zweibach are introductory texts, but A First Course in String Theory may be more suitable for beginners as it provides a more thorough introduction to the basics of string theory and its mathematical framework.

3. Can I read Supergravity or A First Course in String Theory without any prior knowledge of physics?

While some background in physics, particularly classical mechanics and quantum mechanics, may be helpful in understanding the concepts presented in Supergravity and A First Course in String Theory, both books are written in a way that is accessible to readers with little to no prior knowledge of physics.

4. Are there any prerequisites for reading Supergravity or A First Course in String Theory?

Supergravity and A First Course in String Theory both assume a basic understanding of mathematics, including calculus and linear algebra. Some familiarity with quantum mechanics may also be helpful, but is not necessary.

5. Which book is more comprehensive, Supergravity or A First Course in String Theory?

Supergravity and A First Course in String Theory cover different aspects of theoretical physics, with Supergravity focusing on classical gravity and A First Course in String Theory focusing on quantum gravity. Therefore, it is difficult to compare the comprehensiveness of the two books as they cover different topics within the field of theoretical physics.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
9
Views
768
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top