I will talk about my work arxiv:1911.05038. We prove the local-in-time well-posedness for the solution of the compressible Euler equations in $3$-D, for the Cauchy data of the velocity, density and vorticity $(v,\varrho, \omega) \in H^s\times H^s\times H^{s'}$, $2<s'<s$. The result extends the sharp result of Smith-Tataru and Wang, established in the irrotational case, i.e $ \omega=0$, which is known to be optimal for $s>2$. At the opposite extreme, in the incompressible case, i.e. with a constant density, the result is known to hold for $ \omega\in H^s$, $s>3/2$ and fails for $s\le 3/2$, see the work of Bourgain-Li. It is thus natural to conjecture that the optimal result should be $(v,\varrho, \omega) \in H^s\times H^s\times H^{s'}$, $s>2, \, s'>\frac{3}{2}$. We view our work here as an important step in proving the conjecture. The main difficulty in establishing sharp well-posedness results for general compressible Euler flow is due to the highly nontrivial interaction between the sound waves, governed by quasilinear wave equations, and vorticity which is transported by the flow. To overcome this difficulty, we separate the dispersive part of sound wave from the transported part, and gain regularity significantly by exploiting the nonlinear structure of the system and the geometric structures of the acoustic spacetime.
 

I will describe work exploring the spectrum of two-dimensional unitary conformal field theories(CFT) with no extended chiral algebra and central charge larger than one. I will revisit a classical result from analytic number theory by Rademacher, which provides an exact formula for the Fourier coefficients of modular forms of non-positive weight. Generalizing this, I will explain how we employed Rademacher's idea to study the spectral density of two-dimensional CFT of our interest. The expression is given in terms of a Rademacher expansion, which converges for nonzero spin. The implications of our spectral density to the pure gravity in AdS3 will be discussed.

Do you feel unable to explain why maths are cool? Are you looking for fun and affordable theorems for your non-mathematician friends? This is your topic.

This talk aims to be a rigorous introduction to Social Choice Theory, a sub-branch of Game Theory with natural applications to economics, sociology and politics that tries to understand how to determine, based on the personal opinions of all individuals, the collective opinion of society. The goal is to prove the three famous and pessimistic impossibility theorems: Arrow's theorem, Gibbard's theorem and Balinski-Young's theorem. Our blunt conclusion will be that, unfortunately, there are no ideally fair social choice systems. Is there any hope yet?