Oxford

We will introduce a few class of generalised metrisable

properties; that is, properties that hold of all metrisable spaces that

can be used to generalise results and are in some sense 'close' to

metrisability. In particular, we will discuss Moore spaces and the

independence of the normal Moore space conjecture - Is every normal

Moore space metrisable?

In some of their recent work Derbez and Wang studied volumes of representations of 3-manifold groups into the Lie groups $$Iso_e \widetilde{SL_2(\mathbb{R})} \mbox{ and }PSL(2,\mathbb{C}).$$ They computed the set of all volumes of representations for a fixed prime closed oriented 3-manifold with $$\widetilde{SL_2(\mathbb{R})}\mbox{-geometry}$$ and used this result to compute some volumes of Graph manifolds after passing to finite coverings.

In the talk I will give a brief introduction to the theory of volumes of representations and state some of Derbez' and Wang's results. Then I will prove an additivity formula for volumes of representations into $$Iso_e \widetilde{SL_2(\mathbb{R})}$$ which enables us to improve some of the results of Derbez and Wang.

We explore the technique of elementary submodels to prove 
results in topology and set theory. We will in particular prove the 
delta system lemma, and Arhangelskii's result that a first countable 
Lindelof space has cardinality not exceeding continuum.

I will explain why one can symplectically embed closed symplectic manifolds (with integral symplectic form) into CPⁿ and compute the weak homotopy type of the space of all symplectic embeddings of such a symplectic manifold into CP^∞.

The notion of automatic groups emerged from conversations between Bill Thurston and Jim Cannon on the nice algorithmic properties of Kleinian groups. In this introductory talk we will define automatic groups and then discuss why they are interesting. This centres on how automatic groups subsume many other classes of groups (e.g. hyperbolic groups, finitely generated Coxeter groups, and braid groups) and have good properties (e.g. finite presentability, fast solution to the word problem, and type FP_∞).

In 1992 (or thereabouts) Bloch and Kriz gave the first explicit definition of the category of mixed Tate motives (MTM). Their definition relies heavily on the theory of algebraic cycles. Unfortunately, traditional methods of representing algebraic cycles (such as in terms of formal linear combinations of systems of polynomial equations) are notoriously difficult to work with, so progress in capitalizing on this description of the category to illuminate outstanding conjectures in the field has been slow. More recently, Gangl, Goncharov, and Levin suggested a simpler way to understand this category (and by extension, algebraic cycles more generally) by relating specific algebraic cycles to rooted, decorated, planar trees. In our talks, describing work in progress, we generalize this correspondence and attempt to systematize the connection between algebraic cycles and graphs. We will construct a Lie coalgebra L from a certain algebra of admissible graphs, discuss various properties that it satisfies (such as a well defined and simply described realization functor to the category of mixed Hodge structures), and relate the category of co-representations of L to the category MTM. One promising consequence of our investigations is the appearance of alternative bases of rational motives that have not previously appeared in the literature, suggesting a richer rational structure than had been previously suspected. In addition, our results give the first bounds on the complexity of computing admissibility of algebraic cycles, a previously unexplored topic.

Many interesting properties of groups are inherited by their subgroups examples of such are finiteness, residual finiteness and being free. People have asked whether hyperbolicity is inherited by subgroups, there are a few counterexamples in this area. I will be detailing the proof of some of these including a construction due to Rips of a finitely generated not finitely presented subgroup of a hyperbolic group and an example of a finitely presented subgroup which is not hyperbolic.

This is another opportunity to hear the 2013 LMS Presidential Address:

Abstract: The idea of space is central to the way we think.  It is the technology we have evolved for interpreting our experience of the world.  But space is presumably a human creation, and even inside mathematics it plays a variety of different roles, some modelling our intuition very closely and some seeming almost magical.  I shall point out how the homotopy category in particular breaks away from its own roots.  Then I shall describe how quantum theory leads us beyond the well-established notion of a topological space into the realm of noncommutative geometry.  One might think that noncommutative spaces are not very space-like, and yet it is noncommutativity that makes the world look as it does to us, as a collection of point particles.