Prequisites to learn Topological Field Theory?

Question

Sorry for the somewhat qualitative question but what are the essential prerequisites for someone wanting to learn topological field theory from say the more physical side of things? The math side also sounds interesting but it may be a bit heavy going for my current background. I know quantum mechanics, some algebraic topology and some basic manifold theory. Here is the impression of what I have so far:

• Path integral formulation of QFT
• Differential Geometry including differential forms, bundles, cohomology theory etc
• Yang-Mills/Chern-Simons gauge theories
• Knot Theory and the Jones Polynomial

And for a more mathematical view:

• Category Theory.

Baez's book "Gauge Fields, Knots and Gravity" seems to cover a good amount of these topics.

Am I on the right track or should I add/remove any topics from these? Thanks.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-09 07:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user lastone

Comments

Hi lastone, and welcome to Physics Stack Exchange! Questions like this, about the mathematical prerequisites to a physical topic, are not really what this site is for, but you could suggest an edit to the TFT tag wiki that includes this information.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-09 07:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user David Z

---

@DavidZaslavsky he obviosly does not have the information, so he can not suggest a meaningful edit to the the tagwiki ... The ones who ask, are not the ones who can put the information there, that would be the answerers. That is why I still disagree with the direct edits. It will never work unless you successfully launch a large campain to get actually the information needed into the tagwikis. People who possess the information will not put it there just like that such that people who need it, such as this OP, can retrieve it. We have a catch 22 and are stuck with not getting this info at all

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-09 07:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dilaton

---

Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/41589/2451

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-09 07:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user Qmechanic

---

@Dilaton did you notice the information you suggest the OP doesn't have is actually included in the question in this case?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-09 07:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user David Z

---

@DavidZaslavsky In this case he seems to have a rough idea what is needed. But this is certainly not generally the case when people come here to aks about books and mathematical prerequisits. Alternatively to start a campain to get the information put into the tagwikis, if could work if the closing moderators consistently leave a message for the people who would have answered, saying that the answers should be written into the tagwikis AND the closed question does not get deleted before the information actually has been put there.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-09 07:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dilaton

---

Otherwise we will keep being stuck with this "getting-no-new-information-about-books-and-mathematical-prerequisits-to-study-s‌​tuff"-paradox we now face forever ... :-/

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-09 07:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dilaton

---

@Qmechanic it seems that you again overlooked that this question has 3 reopen votes instead of the question being edited. So I guess your voting leave closed even though the community might want to reopen the question was an accident again?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-09 07:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dilaton

---

Prequisite questions often fit poorly on Phys.SE. What can be said objectively about prequisites should be clear from consulting e.g. Wikipedia or the foreword of a textbook on the subject. More than that tends to be primarily opinion-based.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-09 07:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user Qmechanic