Logic Seminar
|
Thu, 30/04/2009 17:00 |
Ivan Tomasic |
Logic Seminar |
L3 |
| Difference schemes constitute important building blocks in the model-theoretic study of difference fields. Our goal is to pursue their number-theoretic aspects much further than required by model theory. Roughly speaking, a difference scheme (variety) is a scheme (variety) with a distinguished endomorphism. We will explain how to extend the methods of etale cohomology to this context and, time permitting, we will show the calculation of difference etale cohomology in some interesting cases. | |||
|
Thu, 07/05/2009 17:00 |
Dugald McPherson (Leeds) |
Logic Seminar |
L3 |
|
Thu, 14/05/2009 17:00 |
TBA |
Logic Seminar |
L3 |
|
Thu, 21/05/2009 11:00 |
Margaret Thomas (Oxford) |
Logic Seminar |
L3 |
|
Thu, 21/05/2009 17:00 |
Moshe Jarden (Tel Aviv) |
Logic Seminar |
L3 |
A theorem of Kuyk says that every Abelian extension of a
Hilbertian field is Hilbertian.
We conjecture that for an Abelian variety defined over
a Hilbertian field
every extension of in is Hilbertian.
We prove our conjecture when is a number field.
The proofs applies a result of Serre about -torsion of
Abelian varieties, information about -adic analytic
groups, and Haran's diamond theorem. |
|||
|
Thu, 28/05/2009 17:00 |
Tim Gendron (Mexico) |
Logic Seminar |
L3 |
This purpose of this talk will be to introduce the idea that the spectrum of nonstandard models of a “standard”
algebraic object can be used much like a microscope with which one may perceive and codify irrationality invisible within the standard model.
This will be done by examining the following three themes:
is detected (as a substructure) by a nonstandard model of the fundamental group of .
of diophantine approximations of a real number , a subgroup of a nonstandard model of the integers, and show how gives rise to a notion of principal ideal generated by .
The general linear group plays here the role of a Galois group, permuting the real ideals of equivalent real numbers.
|
|||
|
Thu, 04/06/2009 17:00 |
Pietro dello Stritto |
Logic Seminar |
L3 |
| In this talk we discuss the main results of my PhD thesis. We begin by giving some background on Moufang polygons. This is followed by a short introduction of the basic model theoretic notions related to the thesis, such as asymptotic classes of finite structures, measurable structures, (superstable) supersimple theories and (finite Morley rank) S_1 rank. We also mention the relation between Moufang polygons and the associated little projective groups. Moufang polygons have been classified by Tits and Weiss, and a complete list is given in their book `Moufang polygons'. This work is inspired by a paper of Kramer, Tent and van Maldeghem called "Simple groups of finite Morley rank and Tits buildings". The authors work in a superstable context. They show that Moufang polygons of finite Morley rank are exactly Pappian polygons, i.e., projective planes, symplectic quadrangles and split Cayley hexagons, provided that they arise over algebraically closed fields. We work under the weaker assumption of supersimplicity. Therefore, we expect more examples. Indeed, apart from those already occuring in the finite Morley rank case, there are four further examples, up to duality, of supersimple Moufang polygons; namely, Hermitian quadrangles in projective dimension 3 and 4, the twisted triality hexagon and the (perfect) Ree-Tits octagon, provided that the underlying field (or `difference' field in the last case) is supersimple. As a result, we obtain the nice characterization that supersimple Moufang polygons are exactly those Moufang polygons belonging to families which also arise over finite fields. Examples of supersimple Moufang polygons are constructed via asymptoticity arguments: every class C of finite Moufang polygons forms an asymptotic class, and every non-principal ultraproduct of C gives rise to a measurable structure, thus supersimple (of finite S_1 rank). For the remaining cases one can proceed as follows: let \Gamma be any Moufang polygon belonging to a family which does not arise over finite fields, and call K its underlying field; then K is (first-order) definable in \Gamma, and by applying some model theoretic facts this definability is inconsistent with supersimplicity". | |||
|
Thu, 11/06/2009 16:00 |
Laurent Moret-Bailly (Rennes) |
Logic Seminar |
L3 |
|
Thu, 18/06/2009 17:00 |
David Evans (Norwich) |
Logic Seminar |
L3 |
| I will talk about two pieces of work on finite covers: (i) Work of Hrushovski which, for a stable theory, links splitting of certain finite covers with higher amalgamation properties; (ii) Joint work of myself and Elisabetta Pastori which uses group cohomology to investigate some non-split finite covers of the set of k-sets from a disintegrated set. | |||

defined over
a Hilbertian field
every extension
of
is Hilbertian.
We prove our conjecture when
-torsion of
Abelian varieties, information about
is detected (as a substructure) by a nonstandard model of the fundamental group of
of diophantine approximations of a real number
, a subgroup of a nonstandard model of the integers, and show how
plays here the role of a Galois group, permuting the real ideals of equivalent real numbers.