Imperial

Igusa's p-adic zeta function $Z(s)$ attached to a polynomial $f$ in $N$ variables is a meromorphic function on the complex plane that encodes the numbers of solutions of the equation $f=0$ modulo powers of a prime $p$. It is expressed as a $p$-adic integral, and Igusa proved that it is rational in $p^{-s}$ using resolution of singularities and the change of variables formula. From this computation it is immediately clear that the order of a pole of $Z(s)$ is at most $N$, the number of variables in $f$. In 1999, Wim Veys conjectured that the only possible pole of order $N$ of the so-called topological zeta function of $f$ is minus the log canonical threshold of $f$. I will explain a proof of this conjecture, which also applies to the $p$-adic and motivic zeta functions. The proof is inspired by non-archimedean geometry and Mirror Symmetry, but the main technique that is used is the Minimal Model program in birational geometry. This talk is based on joint work with Chenyang Xu.

I will speak about weak Fano 3-folds, K3 surfaces and their Picard lattices, and explain how to solve the matching problem in various situations.

The Monopole (Bogomolnyi) equations are Geometric PDEs in 3 dimensions. In this talk I shall introduce a generalization of the monopole equations to both Calabi Yau and G2 manifolds. I will motivate the possible relations of conjectural enumerative theories arising from "counting" monopoles and calibrated cycles of codimension 3. Then, I plan to state the existence of solutions and sketch how these examples are constructed.

SEMINAR CANCELLED

Let G be a finitely generated group generated by g_1,..., g_n. Consider the alphabet A(G) consisting of the symbols g_1,..., g_n and the symbols '+' and '-'. The words in this alphabet represent elements of the integral group ring Z[G]. In the talk we will investigate the computational problem of deciding whether a word in the alphabet A(G) determines a zero-divisor in Z[G]. We will see that a version of the Atiyah conjecture (together with some natural assumptions) imply decidability of the zero-divisor problem; however, we'll also see that in the group (Z/2 \wr Z)^4 the zero-divisor problem is not decidable. The technique which allows one to see the last statement involves "embedding" a Turing machine into a group ring.