Oxford

The concept of a matrix factorization was originally introduced by Eisenbud to study syzygies over local rings of singular hypersurfaces. More recently, interactions with mathematical physics, where matrix factorizations appear in quantum field theory, have provided various new insights. I will explain how matrix factorizations can be studied in the context of noncommutative algebraic geometry based on differential graded categories. We will see the relevance of the noncommutative analogue of de Rham cohomology in terms of classical singularity theory. Finally, I will outline how the Kapustin-Li formula for the noncommutative Serre duality pairing (originally computed via path integral methods) can be mathematically explained using a combination of homological perturbation theory and local duality.
Partly based on joint work with Daniel Murfet.

The concept of a matrix factorization was originally introduced by Eisenbud to study syzygies over local rings of singular hypersurfaces. More recently, interactions with mathematical physics, where matrix factorizations appear in quantum field theory, have provided various new insights. I will explain how matrix factorizations can be studied in the context of noncommutative algebraic geometry based on differential graded categories. We will see the relevance of the noncommutative analogue of de Rham cohomology in terms of classical singularity theory. Finally, I will outline how the Kapustin-Li formula for the noncommutative Serre duality pairing (originally computed via path integral methods) can be mathematically explained using a combination of homological perturbation theory and local duality.
Partly based on joint work with Daniel Murfet.

The use of tensed language and the metaphor of set "formation" found in informal descriptions of the iterative conception of set are seldom taken at all seriously. This talk offers an axiomatisation of the iterative conception in a bimodal language and presents some reasons to thus take the tense more seriously than usual (although not literally).

In {\it Was sind und was sollen die Zahlen?} (1888), Dedekind proves the Recursion Theorem (Theorem 126), and applies it to establish the categoricity of his axioms for arithmetic (Theorem 132). It is essential to these results that mathematical induction is formulated using second-order quantification, and if the second-order quantifier ranges over all subsets of the first-order domain (full second-order quantification), the categoricity result shows that, to within isomorphism, only one structure satisfies these axioms. However, the proof of categoricity is correct for a wide class of non-full Henkin models of second-order quantification. In light of this fact, can the proof of second-order categoricity be taken to establish that the second-order axioms of arithmetic characterize a unique structure?