Timeline for Interpretation of Curvature and Torsion
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 2012 at 20:06 | comment | added | Dox | MTW is a great book, of course one should focus in the mathematical framework and physical interpretation (which is always OK) rather than in the experimental facts (which vary radically with time). I've checked the exterior calculus section and it's very complete and the geometrical interpretation is quite nice! I'd also say that Sean Carroll's book presents the subject with ease, although the geometrical interpretation is not as impressive as in MTW. Thank you guys!!! Today has been a very productive day for my understanding of differential geometry. | |
| Jul 27, 2012 at 18:58 | comment | added | user21349 | Oops, meant 1975, not 1875! | |
| Jul 27, 2012 at 18:57 | comment | added | user21349 | MTW is unique, and will probably be unique forever, for a couple of reasons. One is its very cool and idiosyncratic style, and the other is that it forms a complete encyclopedia of techniques. An example of a place where it's completely obsolete is that it predates both the discovery of dark energy and the modern era of high-precision cosmology. It's from the era when some of the classic solar-system tests of GR were being done (e.g., tests of GR versus Brans-Dicke), and in terms of theory it's from the era when global methods were being rapidly developed (Hawking and Ellis was 1875). | |
| Jul 27, 2012 at 18:46 | comment | added | Robert Bryant | @Ben: Is MTW really obsolete? (Atiyah-McDonald is over 40 years old, too, and I don't think anyone would call it 'obsolete'.) In any case, I wasn't recommending that Dox buy MTW, just consult it. I figure that, given MTW's 'classic' status, it should be readily available pretty much anywhere, many people are familiar with its language and notation, and, as you say, the standard interpretation of torsion hasn't changed in a long time. On the other hand, I'm happy to know of a free, up-to-date reference for these things, so thanks. (As you can probably tell, relativity is not my field.) | |
| Jul 27, 2012 at 18:34 | comment | added | user21349 | MTW is a classic, but considering that it's 40 years old, and relativity (both experimental and theoretical) is a living field, IMO it's probably time to stop pointing people to it as the first "go to" book on GR. Carroll has a text that is up to date, and there is a version that's free online: arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/?9712019 . It has a pretty complete discussion of torsion. Not that the interpretation of torsion has changed since 1973, or even since Cartan in 1923, but all other things being equal, it requires extra justification to point people to an obsolete \$136 book. | |
| Jul 27, 2012 at 15:23 | history | answered | Robert Bryant | CC BY-SA 3.0 |