Geometry Topology and Physics

I suppose I should preface this by saying that I read this book *after* reading similar books, so my ability to understand this book is probably better than others, but that said, I think that my comparative evaluation is free from this bias…

There seem to be a few books on the market that are very similar to this one: Nash & Sen, Frankel, etc. This one is at the top of its class, in my opinion, for a couple reasons:

(1) It’s written like a math text that covers physics-related material, not a book about mathematics for physicists. I prefer this; you may not. As a consequence, this book is more rigorous than its alternatives, it relies less on physical examples, and it cuts out a lot of lengthy explanation that you may not need. Of course, there are drawbacks to all of these “features” — you need to decide what you need and what’s best for you.

(2) It’s most comprehensive, with Frankel coming in second, and Nash & Sen least comprehensive (though they have quite a bit on Fibre bundles and related topics). Nakahara has a chapter on complex manifolds, which is absent from the other two. Nakahara also concludes with a nice intro to string theory, which is absent from the other two as well (though nothing you couldn’t find in Polchinski or the like). Actually — I modify this slightly. Frankel covers less subjects than Nakahara, but with more depth (though also more wordiness — I quit Frankel about 2/3 through because it wasn’t succinct enough and I got tired of it).

Depending on your tastes, I would recommend this book before the other two.

It presupposes that you have an understanding of algebra (groups, rings, fields, etc.) but it has an introduction to the necessary components of topology within. Frankel has presupposes both algebra and topology; Nash & Sen presupposes only algebra.

Download Here

Password: www.ebooksportal.org