Forthcoming Seminars
|
Mon, 17/05/2010 16:00 |
Frank Gounelas (University of Oxford) |
Junior Number Theory Seminar  |
SR1 |
| This talk is the second in a series of an elementary introduction to the ideas unifying elliptic curves, modular forms and Galois representations. I will discuss what it means for an elliptic curve to be modular and what type of representations one associates to such objects. | |||
|
Mon, 17/05/2010 17:00 |
Martin Fuchs (Universität des Saarlandes) |
Partial Differential Equations Seminar |
Gibson 1st Floor SR |
|
Tue, 18/05/2010 12:00 |
Lars Tuset (Hogskolen i Oslo) |
Quantum Field Theory Seminar |
L3 |
|
Tue, 18/05/2010 14:00 |
Emanuele Macri (Utah) |
Algebraic and Symplectic Geometry Seminar |
SR1 |
We report on joint work with Arend Bayer on the space of stability conditions for the canonical bundle on the projective plane.
We will describe a connected component of this space, generalizing and completing a previous construction of Bridgeland.
In particular, we will see how this space is related to classical results of Drezet-Le Potier on stable vector bundles on the projective plane. Using this, we can determine the group of autoequivalences of the derived category. As a consequence, we can identify a  -action on the space of stability conditions, which will give a global picture of mirror symmetry for this example.
In the second hour we will give some details on the proof of the main theorem. |
|||
|
Tue, 18/05/2010 14:30 |
Dan Archdeacon (University of Vermont) |
Combinatorial Theory Seminar |
L3 |
|
Given a graph we want to draw it in the plane; well we *want* to draw it in the plane, but sometimes we just can't. So we resort to various compromises. Sometimes we add crossings and try to minimize the crossings. Sometimes we add handles and try to minimize the number of handles. Sometimes we add crosscaps and try to minimize the number of crosscaps. Sometimes we mix these parameters: add a given number of handles (or crosscaps) and try to minimize the number of crossings on that surface. What if we are willing to trade: say adding a handle to reduce the number of crossings? What can be said about the relative value of such a trade? Can we then add a second handle to get an even greater reduction in crossings? If so, why didn't we trade the second handle in the first place? What about a third handle? The crossing sequence cr_1, cr_2, ... , cr_i, ... has terms the minimum number of crossings over all drawings of G on a sphere with i handles attached. The non-orientable crossing sequence is defined similarly. In this talk we discuss these crossing sequences. By Dan Archdeacon, Paul Bonnington, Jozef Siran, and citing works of others. |
|||
|
Tue, 18/05/2010 15:45 |
Emanuele Macri (Utah) |
Algebraic and Symplectic Geometry Seminar |
L3 |
|
We report on joint work with Arend Bayer on the space of stability conditions for the canonical bundle on the projective plane.
We will describe a connected component of this space, generalizing and completing a previous construction of Bridgeland.
In particular, we will see how this space is related to classical results of Drezet-Le Potier on stable vector bundles on the projective plane. Using this, we can determine the group of autoequivalences of the derived category. As a consequence, we can identify a -action on the space of stability conditions, which will give a global picture of mirror symmetry for this example.
In the second hour we will give some details on the proof of the main theorem. |
|||
|
Tue, 18/05/2010 16:00 |
David Hume (Oxford) |
Junior Geometric Group Theory Seminar |
SR1 |
|
Tue, 18/05/2010 16:30 |
Alan Hammond (University of Oxford) |
Combinatorial Theory Seminar |
SR2 |
| The Wulff droplet arises by conditioning a spin system in a dominant phase to have an excess of signs of opposite type. These gather together to form a droplet, with a macroscopic Wulff profile, a solution to an isoperimetric problem. I will discuss recent work proving that the phase boundary that delimits the signs of opposite type has a characteristic scale, both at the level of exponents and their logarithmic corrections. This behaviour is expected to be shared by a broad class of stochastic interface models in the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang class. Universal distributions such as Tracy-Widom arise in this class, for example, as the maximum behaviour of repulsive particle systems. time permitting, I will explain how probabilistic resampling ideas employed in spin systems may help to develop a qualitative understanding of the random mechanisms at work in the KPZ class. | |||
|
Tue, 18/05/2010 17:00 |
Martin Bridson (Oxford) |
Algebra Seminar |
L2 |
|
Wed, 19/05/2010 11:30 |
Owen Cotton-Barratt (University of Oxford) |
Algebra Kinderseminar |
ChCh, Tom Gate, Room 2 |
|
Wed, 19/05/2010 16:00 |
Martin Escardo (Birmingham) |
Analytic Topology in Mathematics and Computer Science |
L3 |
| tba | |||
|
Wed, 19/05/2010 17:00 |
Benjamin Wardhaugh |
Special Lecture |
L2 |
|
Wed, 19/05/2010 17:00 |
Professor Tom Mullin (University of Manchester) |
Brooke Benjamin Lecture |
L1 |
|
Thu, 20/05/2010 11:00 |
Dr Chris farmer (OCCAM (Oxford)) |
Applied Dynamical Systems and Inverse Problems Seminar |
DH 3rd floor SR |
|
Thu, 20/05/2010 12:00 |
Flavio Cordeiro (Oxford) |
Junior Geometry and Topology Seminar |
SR1 |
|
Poisson quasi-Nijenhuis structures with background (PqNb structures) were recently defined and are one of the most general structures within Poisson geometry. On one hand they generalize the structures of Poisson-Nijenhuis type, which in particular contain the Poisson structures themselves. On the other hand they generalize the (twisted) generalized complex structures defined some years ago by Hitchin and Gualtieri. Moreover, PqNb manifolds were found to be appropriate target manifolds for sigma models if one wishes to incorporate certain physical features in the model. All these three reasons put the PqNb structures as a new and general object that deserves to be studied in its own right.
I will start the talk by introducing all the concepts necessary for defining PqNb structures, making this talk completely self-contained. After a brief recall on Poisson structures, I will define Poisson-Nijenhuis and Poisson quasi-Nijenhuis manifolds and then move on to a brief presentation on the basics of generalized complex geometry. The PqNb structures then arise as the general structure which incorporates all the structures referred above. In the second part of the talk, I will define gauge transformations of PqNb structures and show how one can use this concept to construct examples of such structures. This material corresponds to part of the article arXiv:0912.0688v1 [math.DG]. Also, if time permits, I will shortly discuss the appearing of PqNb manifolds as target manifolds of sigma models. |
|||
|
Thu, 20/05/2010 12:30 |
Gabriel Koch (OxPDE, University of Oxford) |
OxPDE Lunchtime Seminar |
Gibson 1st Floor SR |
In this talk, we describe new profile decompositions for bounded sequences in Banach spaces of functions defined on  . In particular, for "critical spaces" of initial data for the Navier-Stokes equations, we show how these can give rise to new proofs of recent regularity theorems such as those found in the works of Escauriaza-Seregin-Sverak and Rusin-Sverak. We give an update on the state of the former and a new proof plus new results in the spirit of the latter. The new profile decompositions are constructed using wavelet theory following a method of Jaffard. |
|||
|
Thu, 20/05/2010 14:00 |
Dr Jan Van lent (UWE Bristol) |
Computational Mathematics and Applications |
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, nr Didcot |
| In the eighteenth century Gaspard Monge considered the problem of finding the best way of moving a pile of material from one site to another. This optimal transport problem has many applications such as mesh generation, moving mesh methods, image registration, image morphing, optical design, cartograms, probability theory, etc. The solution to an optimal transport problem can be found by solving the Monge-Ampère equation, a highly nonlinear second order elliptic partial differential equation. Leonid Kantorovich, however, showed that it is possible to analyse optimal transport problems in a framework that naturally leads to a linear programming formulation. In recent years several efficient methods have been proposed for solving the Monge-Ampère equation. For the linear programming problem, standard methods do not exploit the special properties of the solution and require a number of operations that is quadratic or even cubic in the number of points in the discretisation. In this talk I will discuss techniques that can be used to obtain more efficient methods. Joint work with Chris Budd (University of Bath). | |||
|
Thu, 20/05/2010 14:30 |
John MacQuarrie (Bristol) |
Representation Theory Seminar |
L3 |
| A profinite group is the inverse limit of an inverse system of finite groups. While such groups are set-wise `big', the inverse system gives profinite groups a close relationship with finite groups - a conduit through which important results can flow. Our goal is to construct a modular representation theory for profinite groups. We show how several foundational results (about relative projectivity, vertices, sources) from the established theory for finite groups can pass through an inverse system, to the limit. | |||
|
Thu, 20/05/2010 16:00 |
Anna Arnth-Jensen (Oxford) |
Number Theory Seminar |
L3 |
|
Thu, 20/05/2010 16:30 |
Gero Miesenboeck (Oxford) |
Differential Equations and Applications Seminar |
L2 |
| An emerging set of methods enables an experimental dialogue with biological systems composed of many interacting cell types—in particular, with neural circuits in the brain. These methods are sometimes called “optogenetic” because they employ light-responsive proteins (“opto-“) encoded in DNA (“-genetic”). Optogenetic devices can be introduced into tissues or whole organisms by genetic manipulation and be expressed in anatomically or functionally defined groups of cells. Two kinds of devices perform complementary functions: light-driven actuators control electrochemical signals; light-emitting sensors report them. Actuators pose questions by delivering targeted perturbations; sensors (and other measurements) signal answers. These catechisms are beginning to yield previously unattainable insight into the organization of neural circuits, the regulation of their collective dynamics, and the causal relationships between cellular activity patterns and behavior. | |||
