(This is a talk I presented for the Classroom Adventures lecture series on January 17, 2014, for high school teachers.)
(Apparently the video of this talk will be made available online. I will link it when it is available.)
(This is a talk I gave for the Canadian IMO team at their 2014 winter camp at York University on Jan 3, 2014.)
The pigeonhole principle is a remarkable combinatorial theorem that looks silly and obvious, but turns out to be quite powerful and useful, especially in the context of contest problem solving. I’m going to present a couple of statements of the pigeonhole principle, then I’ll give some broad applications of it. I’ll end off with a list of problems.
(This is the write-up for a talk I gave in the Toronto Student Set Theory and Topology seminar on May 2, 2013.)
A couple of weeks ago I gave a talk for the set-theoretic topology course I was in, on the topic of cardinal invariants of topological groups. While I was preparing that presentation I discovered the following fact:
Theorem [Tkachenko, 1983] Every -compact group is ccc.
I will present a proof that I have adapted from Tkachenko’s original paper (“Souslin property in free topological groups on bicompacta”) and the proof that appears in Arhangel’skii & Tkachenko’s big purple book (Section 5.3 of Topological Groups and Related Structures). Both proofs involve first proving a Ramsey result about covers of a space, then using this to prove that a particular space has “weak-precalibre ” (i.e. Property K) which is a property that implies ccc. Learning this proof has been part of my ongoing attempt to learn how Ramsey results show up in topology.
(This is a presentation I gave for Bill Weiss’ course Set-Theoretic Topology on April 19, 2013. In class we discussed some cardinal invariants and how they are related; here I will survey what happens when we look at the cardinal invariants of topological groups.)
This review follows very closely the discussion in section 5.2 of Arhangel’skii and Tkachenko’s book “Topological Groups and Related Structures“. Another good resource is section 3 of Comfort’s article “Topological Groups” in the Handbook of Set-Theoretic Topology. The only thing I claim to be my own are the (unsourced) pictures I have provided.
On Sunday March 24, 2013, I gave a talk on the History of Cryptography [PDF], at the University of Toronto (Scarborough) for the parents of students writing the Kangaroo Contest. I had many questions after my talk, so here are some answers to the questions I received.
Where did you get this information?
Most of this talk came from Elementary Number Theory by David M. Burton, the Wikipedia article for RSA, and the Wikipedia article for Diffie-Hellman. As a general rule of thumb, Wikipedia is a reliable source for things of a mathematical nature (as only experts tend to edit the articles).
My child is interested in codes, what are some resources for them to learn more?
Here is a great introduction to modular arithmetic which serves as the foundation for learning about the math of cryptography. Modular arithmetic is like “clock math”, where 4 hours after 10 o’clock is 2 o’clock.
Codecademy is a very good way to start learning computer programming. It is a very fun website and is very motivating, and fun!
On February 15, 2013, I gave a talk entitled “A robust family of topological groups on “.
(This was the basis for a talk I gave at the Toronto Student Set Theory and Topology seminar on January 15, 2013. The assumed knowledge is an undergraduate course in general topology. This is only a draft, and will be updated soon.)
There are many questions in mathematics and sciences in general whose main object of study is the topological group. These objects are very versatile and can represent many of the structures we encounter. One question that I’ve been working on examines the (extreme) dynamical properties of topologies on the integers. On the recommendation of Vladimir Pestov (one of my advisors) I have been learning about T-sequences, which provide a rich method for producing topological groups with extreme behaviour. Here I will present two techniques involving T-sequences that help to answer two different questions about topological groups; one is about dynamics and the other is about combinatorial properties of . These results all come from “Topologies on the Integers” by Protasov and Zelenyuk.
It came to my attention that Leo Goldmakher had written up notes for a lecture I gave in August 2011 on the proof of Hindman’s Theorem via ultrafilters. The notes are quite nice so I thought I would share them.
The lecture I gave follows the papers:
- “An Algebraic Proof of van der Waerden’s Theorem” by Vitaly Bergelson, Hillel Furstenburg, Neil Hindman and Yitzhak Katznelson. (L’enseignement Mathematique, t. 35, 1989, p. 209-215)
- “Ultrafilters: Some Old and some New Results” (pdf) by W.W. Comfort. (Bulletin of the AMS, Volume 83, Number 4, July 1977)
(After writing some posts directed at other mathematicians, here is one for everybody.)
I was sifting through some old issues of Crux Mathematicorum last Friday. For those of you who don’t know, this is a wonderful magazine that contains tons of math questions generally like those you would see in a math contest or olympiad, and the difficulty ranges from elementary school to undergraduate. In the September 2009 issue, I stumbled upon the following nice problem originally from the 2005 Brazilian Mathematical Olympiad. It is one of those problems that is mathematical in flavour and doesn’t need any previous math knowledge to begin thinking about the problem. For me, a nice problem is one that rewards you for thinking about it and can be attacked from many different angles.
So here’s the problem as stated:
We have four charged batteries, four uncharged batteries, and a flashlight which needs two charged batteries to work. We do not know which batteries are charged and which ones are uncharged. What is the least number of attempts that suffices to make sure the flashlight will work? (An attempt consists of putting two batteries in the flashlight and checking if the flashlight works or not.)