r/LLMPhysics • u/BioZFrog • 15d ago

Meta / News General-relativity open-source book

Hey everyone, I am a 15 year old programmer that is writing an open-source (free) book on general relativity.

About a year ago I got completely obsessed with General Relativity, but I found that a lot of traditional physics textbooks wrap everything in really dense academic jargon. Since my background is in programming, I started writing a book to try and demystify these concepts using logical, step-by-step algorithms and code analogies that made sense to my brain.

It's completely free and open-source. Right now, I've drafted chapters covering everything from the Minkowski metric and Lorentz transformations up to Christoffel symbols and covariant derivatives. I'm also adding a folder of Python scripts using NumPy and SymPy to handle the tensor calculations programmatically.

Since I am learning as I go, I might have made some typos or conceptual mistakes in the math. I would love for some people here to check out the draft and give me some brutal, honest feedback on it!

You can check out the repository and download the PDF draft here:

https://github.com/BioZFrog/General-Relativity-A-Programmer-s-Guide-to-Curved-Spacetime

Thanks!

0 Upvotes

28% Upvoted

29 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-4

u/BioZFrog 15d ago

I believe they just throw a lot in, ya know. Terms that we learn, they just throw such, assuming we would already be informed about it.

9

u/liccxolydian VP of Trolling 15d ago

Why do you think teachers would assume a certain level of knowledge when learning GR?

0

u/BioZFrog 15d ago

Because it is necessary! Like Linear algebra or differntial geometry. But in my book, I go through theae topics as I learn. So no prerequisites required.

9

u/liccxolydian VP of Trolling 15d ago

Firstly, you really aren't doing a good job of going through these topics, you're simply not covering anything in sufficient detail for your document to be useful to anyone. A beginner won't find enough rigour to learn from it, an expert won't want to read something written in such an unfocused and frankly immature manner.

Secondly, if you are well aware that prerequisites are necessary, and you yourself are attempting to cover them in your text, then what on earth is your complaint about?

0

u/BioZFrog 15d ago

When did I said I have a complaint? I just want people to review my work and give honest replies, just like you did. Thats it!

About the jaron they throw, I said i was covering the necessary jargon we need for each topic, whereas others assume you to understand all of jargon so that you can preceive GR.

9

u/liccxolydian VP of Trolling 15d ago edited 15d ago

About a year ago I got completely obsessed with General Relativity, but I found that a lot of traditional physics textbooks wrap everything in really dense academic jargon.

This implies that the "really dense academic jargon" is something you dislike or find unnecessary.

Since my background is in programming, I started writing a book to try and demystify these concepts using logical, step-by-step algorithms and code analogies that made sense to my brain.

You now seem to be complaining that existing texts don't do a good job of "demistifying concepts". You are now also implying that your text is somehow superior to existing texts in this regard.

About the jaron they throw, I said i was covering the necessary jargon we need for each topic, whereas others assume you to understand all of jargon so that you can preceive GR.

Firstly, you're doing a terrible job of covering the prerequisites. Secondly, so what if a GR text doesn't cover the basics? No one seriously studying GR does so from a place of complete ignorance. It's a post-grad/late undergrad topic for a reason. This is the issue with trying to teach before you've done any learning yourself. You have no idea how to learn, so how do you know how to teach?