Lieven Le Bruyn vacation reading

Lieven Le Bruyn has posted his vacation reading. I was planning on eventually writing something about Victor Ginzburg’s Lectures on Noncommutative Geometry, which is a survey of noncommutative geometry. Berest and Chalykh’s A∞ modules and Calogero-Moser Spaces. A∞ algebras are a generalization of algebras where the multiplication goes horribly wrong. Calogero-Moser space is a space that parametrizes right ideals in the Weyl algebra. These are two topics that I’d like to learn, so it looks interesting.

Expander Graphs

It’s basically impossible to know all of the important concepts and results in mathematics. It’s impossible to even have heard of all of the important concepts and results in mathematics. For example, I’d never heard of expander graphs, which apparently have widespread applications in combinatorics and computer science, and even have an interpretation in terms of group representations.

Michael Nielsen has a series of posts on expander graphs beginning here. For more background, he links to lecture notes on the subject by Linial and Wigderson.

Igor Dolgachev

Igor Dolgachev, a mathematician at the University of Michigan, has made available lecture notes on topics in algebraic geometry and physics. The lecture notes in algebraic geometry include invariant theory and what he calls “classical algebraic geometry”. He also provides an introduction to theoretical physics for mathematicians, and as well as one on string theory.

Project Euclid

Project Euclid is a project of Cornell University to mathematical journals online. The site hosts a mix of free and for-pay journals, but several journals are available completely free:

So for example, if you’re interesting in seeing Feit and Thompson’s proof of the odd order theorem in the Pacific Journal of Mathematics, you can find it here.

Lax Attack

Last week, when Michael asked for a list of fundamental theorems in different branches of mathematics, Juan de Mairena suggested the Lax Equivalence Theorem as a candidate. Today on ArXiv I spotted a paper that makes the rather dramatic claim that the theorem is “wrong” — not that it is wrong in the strict mathematical sense, but that its conditions are not realistic for real-world problems. I’m not in a position to evaluate the claim (I never even heard of the result until Juan’s comment), but I thought it was interesting to see a paper on the subject so soon after we discussed it.