As a rule of thumb, the dominant resistive force on a cyclist riding along a flat road at a speed above 10mph is aerodynamic drag; at higher speeds, this drag becomes even more influential because of its non-linear dependence on speed. Reducing drag, therefore, is of critical importance in bicycle racing, where winning margins are frequently less than a tyre's width (over a 200+km race!). I shall discuss a mathematical model of aerodynamic drag in cycling, present mathematical reasoning behind some of the decisions made by racing cyclists when attempting to minimise it, and touch upon some of the many methods of aerodynamic drag assessment.

In this talk we will introduce quantifier elimination and give various examples of theories with this property. We will see some very useful applications of quantifier elimination to algebra and geometry that will hopefully convince you how practical this property is to other areas of mathematics.

Using non-minimal pure spinor superspace, Cederwall has constructed BRST-invariant actions for D=10 super-Born-Infeld and D=11 supergravity which are quartic in the superfields. But since the superfields have explicit dependence on the non-minimal pure spinor variables, it is non-trivial to show these actions correctly describe super-Born-Infeld and supergravity. In this talk, I will expand solutions to the equations of motion from the pure spinor action for D=10 abelian super Born-Infeld to leading order around the linearized solutions and show that they correctly describe the interactions expected. If I have time, I will explain how to generalize these ideas to D=11 supergravity.

We continue the study by Melo and Winter [arXiv:1712.01763, 2017] on the possible intersection sizes of a $k$-dimensional subspace with the vertices of the $n$-dimensional hypercube in Euclidean space. Melo and Winter conjectured that all intersection sizes larger than $2^{k-1}$ (the “large” sizes) are of the form $2^{k-1} + 2^i$. We show that this is almost true: the large intersection sizes are either of this form or of the form $35\cdot2^{k-6}$ . We also disprove a second conjecture of Melo and Winter by proving that a positive fraction of the “small” values is missing.