311 – HW2

Following Venema’s book, we examine a “toy” collection of incidence axioms: Our primitive (undefined) terms are point, line, and the relation “to lie on” (between a point and a line)

1. For every pair of distinct points and there exists exactly one line such that both and lie on .
2. For every line there exist at least two distinct points and such that both and lie on .
3. There exist three points that do not all lie on any one line.

Axiom 3 gives us in particular that there are at least three points. However, as shown in lecture (or see example 2.2.2 in Venema’s book), we cannot prove from these axioms that there are more than three, because there is a model of these axioms with precisely three points, and three lines, each line containing exactly two of the points.

For a fixed positive integer , replace axiom 2 with axiom :

For every line there exist at least  distinct points, all of which lie on .

(In particular, axiom is the same as axiom 2.)

Now consider the theory  consisting of axioms 1, , and 3. The comment above indicates that the smallest possible number of points that a model of can have is three.

1. Try to find the smallest possible number of points that a model of can have. That is, describe a model of with as few points as you can manage. (To show that the number, say , you find is optimal, that is, it cannot be reduced, one would need to prove from the axioms of the theorem that says that there exist at least points. That would be great, but I am not requiring that. The number you identify does not need to be optimal, but try to make it as small as possible. Of course, for all we know at this point, it could well be that any model of is infinite.)
2. Do the same for and .
3. If possible, can you say something in general about the number of points of the smallest model of (as a function of )?

The implicit suggestion here is to play with these theories, trying to understand what can and cannot be deduced from them. Ryan suggested to look at a variant of axiom 3, namely: Given any points, there is another point such that the resulting points do not all lie on the same line. Is this a theorem of ? Are there other interesting variants we can consider?

Feel free to include in your homework any results you find about these theories or their models, even if not directly related to the three questions above.

(In principle, this set is due February 2 at the beginning of lecture, but if needed, I am fine with extending the deadline so you have time to further explore the axioms. Let me know.)

Advertisement

403/503 – HW5

Show that affine spaces are closed under affine combinations, that is: If is an affine space, is any positive integer, are any vectors in , and are any reals such that

,

then .

(Due February 2 at the beginning of lecture.)

Ninjas

Last weekend was Francisco’s birthday party. (The actual birthday is at the end of the year, during the holidays.)

403/503 – HW4

Let and let be an matrix with real entries. Set , and suppose that . Show that is an affine space.

(Due January 29 at the beginning of lecture.)

403/503 – HW3

Recall that a vector space is said to be of dimension , , iff there is an independent subset of of size , and no independent subset has size .

A basis of a vector space is any independent set whose span is .

Suppose that is a vector space of dimension . In lecture we showed that a subset of of size is independent iff it spans . Show the following:

1. has a basis, and all bases have size .
2. If is independent, then there is a basis of with .

(Due January 27 at the beginning of lecture.)

403/503 – HW2

Let be a vector space. In lecture we verified that the following two statements about a set are equivalent:

• For any and any scalars and , if , then for all .
• For any and any scalars , if , then for all .

Recall that the set is independent iff no element of is in the span of the other elements, that is, for any , we have that .

1. Show that is independent iff the two (equivalent) statements above hold.

(Due January 22 at the beginning of lecture.)

311 – HW1

Go through the first 28 propositions of Book 1 of Euclid’s Elements. Make a list of the unjustified inferences you observe in the proofs.

(Due January 20 at the beginning of lecture.)

403/503 – HW1

Use the axioms of vector space to verify that if is a vector space over a field , then:

1. For any , we have ,
2. For any , we have , and
3. For any , we have .

(Due January 20, at the beginning of lecture.)

Shehzad Ahmed – Coanalytic determinacy and sharps

Shehzad is my most recent student, having completed his M.S. thesis on May last year. He is currently pursuing his PhD at Ohio University. His page is here, and he also keeps a blog.

Shehzad

His thesis, -determinacy and sharps, is a survey of the Harrington-Martin theorem, showing the equivalence between a definable fragment of determinacy, and a large cardinal hypothesis.

After the fold, I review the basic notions, and give the tiniest of hints of what the theorem is and how its proof goes. Since the material is technical, the post is not really self-contained.

311 Foundations of Geometry – Syllabus

Math 311: Foundations of geometry.

Andrés E. Caicedo.
Contact Information: See here.
Time: TTh 12 – 1:15 pm.
Place: Mathematics Building, Room 124.
Office Hours: T, 1:30 – 3:00 pm.

Textbook: Our main reference will be:

• Gerard A. Venema. Foundations of geometry. Second edition, 2012, Pearson.

There are many other excellent texts that cover similar material, and you may benefit from consulting some of them on occasion. I am partial to:

• Nikolaĭ Vladimirovich Efimov. Higher geometry.1980, Mir.

You may also find useful to consult Euclid‘s Elements or Hilbert‘s Foundations of Geometry. I will suggest additional references if needed.

Contents: The department’s course description reads:

Euclidean, non-Euclidean, and projective geometries from an axiomatic point of view.

We will discuss the axiomatic systems for geometry that the textbook discusses, but also discuss axiomatics in general, and their role in modern mathematics. This is a theoretical course, and you are expected to produce proofs on your own as required.

Grading: Based on homework. Some routine problems will be assigned frequently, to be turned in from one lecture to the next, and some more challenging problems will be posted periodically, and more time will be provided for those. No extensions will be granted, and no late work will be accepted. I expect there will be no exams, but if we see the need, you will be informed reasonably in advance. Even if you collaborate with others and work in groups, the work you turn in should be written on your own. Give credit as appropriate: Make sure to list all books, websites, and people you collaborated with or consulted while working on the homework. If relevant, indicate what software packages you used, and include any programs you may have written, or additional data. Failure to provide credit or to indicate these sources will affect your grade.

I may ask you to meet with me to discuss details of homework sets, and I suggest that before you turn in your work, you make a copy, so you can consult it if needed.

Occasionally, I post links to supplementary material on Google+ and Twitter.