What are the prerequisites for understanding The Ricci Flow?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy84
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Flow
AI Thread Summary
Understanding The Ricci Flow requires a solid foundation in advanced calculus, real and complex analysis, partial differential equations, Riemannian geometry, and topology. While differential equations are not heavily emphasized, familiarity with differential geometry is essential, and introductory texts like "Elementary Differential Geometry" by Barrett O'Neill can be helpful. Self-study is encouraged, especially for those in regions with limited academic resources, and recommended books include "Introduction to Smooth Manifolds" by John Lee and "Lectures on Differential Geometry" by Shing Tung Yau. Engaging with complex analysis and further mathematical topics will also support comprehension of Perelman's proof of the Poincaré Conjecture. A commitment to learning and tackling challenging material is crucial for success in this area of mathematics.
Jimmy84
Messages
190
Reaction score
0
I started to read the book "The Poincare Conjecture In Search of The Shape of The Universe."
It is a terrific book that explains the history of Poincare's conjecture in layman terms.

The book changed the way that I visualize mathematics.
I was wondering what is the mathematical background that is needed in order to be able to study and to understand The Ricci Flow?

Appart from advanced calculus, real/complex analysis, PDE, Riemannian Geometry, and Topology. What else is needed?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It's great that you want to learn more about mathematics. Many great mathematicians learned the art by themselves, not in a University setting.

Riemannian geometry is just a branch of Differential Geometry, and many books on this subject cover Ricci flow too, so you'd be on the right track reading a basic differential geometry book. Unfortunately, I can't think of any popular ones right off the top of my head. The book we used was Elementary Differential Geometry by Barrett O'Neill, but I don't remember Ricci flow being covered. It was really just an introductory text.

Contrary to what it's name might imply, you don't need much knowledge of differential equations (ODEs or PDEs) to be able to follow differential geometry.

If you've already been exposed to things like advanced calculus and basic topology, and you are willing to follow long, complicated, sometimes counter-intuitive logical discussions, differential geometry should be a swallow-able pill for you. But if you haven't, you should definitely NOT pick up a differential geometry book as it will seem too arcane and will put you off entirely.
 
IttyBittyBit said:
It's great that you want to learn more about mathematics. Many great mathematicians learned the art by themselves, not in a University setting.

Riemannian geometry is just a branch of Differential Geometry, and many books on this subject cover Ricci flow too, so you'd be on the right track reading a basic differential geometry book. Unfortunately, I can't think of any popular ones right off the top of my head. The book we used was Elementary Differential Geometry by Barrett O'Neill, but I don't remember Ricci flow being covered. It was really just an introductory text.

Contrary to what it's name might imply, you don't need much knowledge of differential equations (ODEs or PDEs) to be able to follow differential geometry.

If you've already been exposed to things like advanced calculus and basic topology, and you are willing to follow long, complicated, sometimes counter-intuitive logical discussions, differential geometry should be a swallow-able pill for you. But if you haven't, you should definitely NOT pick up a differential geometry book as it will seem too arcane and will put you off entirely.

Im teaching myself mathematics, the problem is that in my country there is no math research and the math major takes you just to analysis and probability. They wouldn't include topology and differential geomery.

Im going to attempt taking a math and a physics major since the math is pretty straightforward.

For differential geometry, I have been told that "Introduction to Smooth Manifolds" by John Lee is good.
What about "Lectures on Differential Geometry" by Shing Tung Yau ?

Appart from this what further mathematical background is needed to fully understand Perelman's result of the Poincare Conjecture?
 
Im teaching myself mathematics, the problem is that in my country there is no math research and the math major takes you just to analysis and probability. They wouldn't include topology and differential geomery.

Most universities at least offer optional courses in these areas. If they don't, that's really strange, because I've been to universities in the hinterlands of third-world countries that offered at least basic diff geom.

What kind of math have you done (in an academic setting or independently) ?
 
IttyBittyBit said:
Most universities at least offer optional courses in these areas. If they don't, that's really strange, because I've been to universities in the hinterlands of third-world countries that offered at least basic diff geom.

What kind of math have you done (in an academic setting or independently) ?

Independently in my spare time I am doing Apostol's book, later I am looking forward to do Advanced Calculus by Loomis Sternberg and Principles of Mathematical Analisis by Rudin.
Do you know any good book for complex analysis?

Im almost sure that they don't offer differential geoemtry I will try to ask to the college soon.
 
About complex analysis, you're probably asking the wrong guy.

If you someday understand Perelman's proof, be sure to post your thoughts here on this forum so lazy people like me can be enlightened!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top