Looking for a book on GR
in [Physics]
|
Prev: ***Re: Experts doubt Einstein..... but Einstein Dingleberriesstill worship him
Next: Antonio Sanchez Turbine. Benchmark in the wind tunnel
From: Pol Lux on 8 Jun 2010 23:38 On Jun 8, 6:32 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote: > On Jun 8, 5:46 pm, Pollux <po....(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm looking for a good book on GR that would teach the maths in an > > accessible way (that doesn't _start_ with sections of tangents bundles > > and differential forms). Any suggestion? > > If you can to postpone gravity and topology > this nearly fills your bill: > > "Maxwells Equations and the Principles of Electromagnetism" > Richard Fitzpatrick > ISBN 1934015202 > > Much of it is available online:http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node106.html > > Sue... > > > > > > > Pollux > > > --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...(a)netfront.net --- Thanks! Pollux
From: Pol Lux on 8 Jun 2010 23:39 On Jun 8, 6:32 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote: > On Jun 8, 5:46 pm, Pollux <po....(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm looking for a good book on GR that would teach the maths in an > > accessible way (that doesn't _start_ with sections of tangents bundles > > and differential forms). Any suggestion? > > If you can to postpone gravity and topology > this nearly fills your bill: > > "Maxwells Equations and the Principles of Electromagnetism" > Richard Fitzpatrick > ISBN 1934015202 > > Much of it is available online:http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node106.html > > Sue... > > > > > > > Pollux > > > --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...(a)netfront.net --- Thanks! Pollux
From: Matthew Lybanon on 9 Jun 2010 10:48 In article <humdnc$1s0i$1(a)adenine.netfront.net>, Pollux <po.lux(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I'm looking for a good book on GR that would teach the maths in an > accessible way (that doesn't _start_ with sections of tangents bundles > and differential forms). Any suggestion? > > Pollux > > --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net --- C. Clarke, Elementary General Relativity, John Wiley & Sons (Halsted Press), 1979. ("Elementary" is a relative term, which is fitting.)
From: Pollux on 9 Jun 2010 11:35 (6/9/10 7:48 AM), Matthew Lybanon wrote: > In article<humdnc$1s0i$1(a)adenine.netfront.net>, > Pollux<po.lux(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm looking for a good book on GR that would teach the maths in an >> accessible way (that doesn't _start_ with sections of tangents bundles >> and differential forms). Any suggestion? >> >> Pollux >> >> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net --- > > C. Clarke, Elementary General Relativity, John Wiley& Sons (Halsted Press), 1979. ("Elementary" is a relative term, which is fitting.) Thanks! I looked up that book, and it sent me to that page on the internet, which might be interesting to other people, it's a "guide to relativity books": http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/PhysFAQ/Administrivia/rel_booklist.html Pollux --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net ---
From: Michael Moroney on 9 Jun 2010 21:04
Robert Higgins <robert_higgins_61(a)hotmail.com> writes: >On Jun 9, 5:35 pm, Pollux <po....(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> (6/9/10 2:32 PM), Robert Higgins wrote: >> >> > Strange advice from an "engineer" who can't do simple calculus, who >> > can't even understand the DEFINITION of the derivative - never mind >> > something "advanced" like L'Hopital's rule. I don't know about >> > students in the U.K., but intelligent American high school seniors (16 >> > -18 years old) have no trouble with calculus. >> >> Well, he has a problem distinguishing "advice" and "insult" anyway. >> Never occurred to him that he could separate the two, give the advice >> without the insult. I'm tempted to test his vocabulary, see if it's not >> just mostly made up of insulting words... >You'll see that it is made up almost entirely of insulting words. John Parker ("Androcles") has been known to give decent answers to scientific questions in the past -- as long as the topic is far away from/unrelated to relativity or Einstein. If relativity is involved in any way, he goes into full-blown kook mode and is unable to respond with much more than a string of written sewage that would make a sailor blush. I haven't seen such sane responses from him lately, perhaps the dementia is rapidly taking over. |