Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Physics
Special and General Relativity
Why are General relativity texts so much more formal?
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="paralleltransport, post: 6567788, member: 589748"] I'm not sure that's quite true. QFT is almost never applied in engineering but is not taught formally the first time either. Similarly QM is very rarely used in real life work. Even in semiconductor research it's semi-classical treatments rarely the full formalism. Yet QM is not taught formally either. Finally I have a hard time believing GR research involves thinking about manifold point set topology. We all know that the physics breaks down at the Planck scale, so there's no point even debating the smoothness of the manifold. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Physics
Special and General Relativity
Why are General relativity texts so much more formal?
Back
Top