Timeline for Reference for de Rham cohomology for physicists
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2018 at 16:38 | vote | accept | Nicolas Boerger | ||
| Jan 10, 2018 at 16:38 | vote | accept | Nicolas Boerger | ||
| Jan 10, 2018 at 16:38 | |||||
| May 21, 2017 at 3:03 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 21, 2017 at 11:30 | |||||
| May 19, 2017 at 17:24 | answer | added | user1504 | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 19, 2017 at 17:13 | answer | added | user74900 | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 16, 2017 at 17:56 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 16, 2017 at 19:50 | |||||
| May 16, 2017 at 17:41 | comment | added | Alex M. | Why is this appropriate on MO rather than on MSE? | |
| May 16, 2017 at 17:11 | comment | added | Paul Siegel | I like the book "From Calculus to Cohomology" by Madsen and Tornehave for this sort of thing, as well as the "Topology, Geometry, and Gauge Fields" series by Naber. But starting with nothing and getting through de Rham cohomology in one summer feels ambitious, let alone the quantum hall effect. | |
| May 16, 2017 at 16:32 | comment | added | Denis Nardin | What about an elementary differential geometry textbook? (I am thinking of a mixture of chapters from Lee's differentiable manifolds plus the appendix of Milnor-Stasheff for the characteristic classes material). Would that also be too advanced? | |
| May 16, 2017 at 16:18 | history | asked | Nicolas Boerger | CC BY-SA 3.0 |