561

(Untitled)

Oct 19, 2009 01:59

Can anyone suggest a guide to general relativity for someone with a pure maths background? In particular I am interested in the exact solutions and their properties. There must be a book out there for someone who is happy with UG/PG algebra and analysis but who tended to avoid anything which involved a method and has a poor grasp of the ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 5

minus10 October 19 2009, 09:41:51 UTC
There *may* have been a time when I understood the math on those pages, but sadly it feels like the lightest touch of a familiar breeze these days.

I have to make do with bad sci-fi for time paradox these days.

Reply

561 October 19 2009, 09:56:05 UTC
On the Godel metric page I have to say I understand some of the maths terms but cannot follow. Some of the terms are only vague memories but not something I don't think I could go back to understanding if needed. But, a wikipedia page is not the place to start and I have never done anything involving tensors... so I can't think in them.

The page on CTCs which led me to read more about light cones and spacetime metrics was much easier to begin to follow but I can't piece together the actual maths, it is like trying to start in the middle with someone assuming the wrong maths background and the wrong intention of the reader. Then I tried to understand Cauchy horizon and got lost.

Reply

561 October 19 2009, 09:59:08 UTC
Oh, and yes, bad sci-fi is much easier :)

Just I was surprised to know that there are exact solutions that have strange properties and I wondered structurally what range of properties the solutions permit.

Reply


kittensofdoom October 19 2009, 14:18:32 UTC
ask ben... but as he prefers lasers and hitting things with hammers he might not be much use...

Reply

561 October 19 2009, 20:13:55 UTC
This is a good plan, I will ask him next time I see him.

I have found an undergraduate textbook I have access too which is aimed at and written by a mathematician. I am going to read that to start out mainly because I understood the entire first seven pages except to look up what some assumed background that I had actually just forgotten.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up