The road to theory of Lie groups
I'm cleared to take graduate courses shamelessly as an undergraduate by the head of department, which is nice, but probably makes me the only freshman physics major doing graduate math courses for some time... I feel kind of bad for my roommate. The courses in my first semester look like this (not in their exact names):
- Group theory
- Continuum modeling
- Lebesgue integral properties and measure
- Partial differential equations
- Applications of complex variables
- Complex analysis
- Differential equations (boundary value problems)
- Continuum modeling (graduate level)
- Honors differential equations
- Geometry of manifolds
- Abstract algebra (w/ Galois theory, rings, Abelian groups etc.)
- Partial differential equations (applications of Hilbert spaces)
- Partial differential equations (more methods)
It looks ridiculously long, but it makes sense if you know the prequisites - a much shorter list:
- Single-variable calculus
- Multivariable and vector calculus
- Real analysis
- Tensor calculus
- Linear algebra
- Differential equations
Most of these fall prey to my current reading list:
- Spivak, Calculus
- Courant & Fritz, Introduction to Calculus and Analysis I
- Courant & Fritz, Introduction to Calculus and Analysis II
- Apostol, Calculus Vol 1: One-variable Calculus with an Introduction to Linear Algebra
- Apostol, Calculus Vol 2: Multi-Variable Calculus and Linear Algebra with Applications
- Spiegel, Schaum's Outline of Advanced Calculus
- Spivak, Calculus on Manifolds
- Mattuck, Introduction to Analysis
- Kolmogorov & Fomin, Introductory Real Analysis
- Kolmogorov & Fomin, Elements of the Theory of Functions and Functional Analysis
- Hoffman & Kunze, Linear Algebra
- Lipschutz, Schaum's Outline of Linear Algebra
- Tenenbaum & Pollard, Ordinary Differential Equations
- Gallian, Contemporary Abstract Algebra
I only have NO idea where to get a good text on tensor calculus besides the appendices of some really good general relativity textbooks. Also, I frankly prefer Spivak over Apostol. My only complaint is that Spivak doesn't develop ODEs and linear algebra such that I can attack a second course in linear algebra - and even makes it rather hard to handle Hoffman & Kunze immediately. The problems in Spivak's book are really, really HARD, too, but enjoyable. The advantage, though, is that I will find Calculus on Manifolds and A Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry more accessible, both of which are great books.
The two Schaum's Outlines are very easy to understand, and it's my style to complement a heavily theoretical book with Schaum's Outlines for computational problems, examples and a more application/engineering/plug-and-chuck style.
There's Tenenbaum & Pollard and Kolmogorov & Fomin, which are really cheap. I haven't touched them, but the reviews are really positive. I also enjoyed Mathematics for Physicists by Dennery & Krzywicki, so I have no qualms about buying Dover books - they are the absolute value for money. I know that Rudin's three books on analysis are classics, too, but they're seriously costly. I liked Prof Mattuck's lectures, making his book a must-have for me.
This brings me to my conclusion. College physics is a troublesome affair. You could encounter contour integrals and differential operators in as early as your second introductory course, whereas you could be doing some 5-6 courses before you finally encounter these through a course in advanced calculus (multivariate, vector etc.) Now, there are two quick tricks to go about this. First, calculus, methods in ordinary differential equations and linear algebra are at the root of everything. If you cracked these, you'll have unlocked the next courses, e.g. group theory, partial differential equations, real analysis etc. It is quite silly to have unlocked calculus and ODEs, but be unable to proceed with modeling because you forgot to take a course in linear algebra. I also learned this the hard way: I had no idea what was going on in Spivak's "Calculus on Manifolds" even though it was supposed to proceed immediately after his "Calculus" - because I wasn't adept with linear algebra.
There is another way - if you were exposed to everything from the ground up, i.e. analysis first instead of single variable calculus (like me), then it's really messy but it's tutte le strade portano a Roma... all roads lead to Rome Lie groups anyway... and calculus becomes a free frag. Heck, fluid dynamics made me stare at differential operators like an idiot before I even knew what a cross product was.
Secondly, I think that it is better to invest the first few semesters entirely on mathematics. Be an undercover math major if you like.
Frankly, many courses interest me. Music, professional writing, two or three computing languages, numerical and statistical courses, signals and electrical engineering courses... But I will leave those for last.
2 comments:
That's a lot of math. I'm concentrating on measure theory, real analysis, complex analysis and abstract algebra.
I strongly dislike differential equations. I prefer analysis. Hate stats as well, as well as numerical analysis.
Are you taking these classes in Singapore?
Mmmhmm, frankly I'm worried if I'm well-equipped enough by then, but the courses are set in stone. Everything branching from calculus is definitely OK for me, but I'm also definitely weaker in topology and algebra, coming from high school after all. Are you planning to enter academia, be a full-time member of a faculty?
Lol yes I don't like statistics and numerical analysis very much myself, suppose you could tell from my choice of courses.
Nope, it's all the work of self-study. A lot of my exposure came from research, though. I find Singapore's math curriculum rather weak: we compare rather poorly to US on the Olympiad medal tally, even though the average student has the mechanical prowess to score perfectly on the SAT II. (I too had a perfect score but that was also the 89th percentile nationwide!)
Post a Comment