scholarly journals Notes on Motives in Finite Characteristic

2009 ◽  
pp. 213-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxim Kontsevich
Keyword(s):  
Finite Characteristic

scholarly journals Conjectures on Stably Newton Degenerate Singularities

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Stevens
Keyword(s):  
Characteristic Zero ◽  
Arbitrary Number ◽  
Milnor Number ◽  
Plane Curves ◽  
Newton Diagram ◽  
Finite Characteristic ◽  
Vanishing Cycles

AbstractWe discuss a problem of Arnold, whether every function is stably equivalent to one which is non-degenerate for its Newton diagram. We argue that the answer is negative. We describe a method to make functions non-degenerate after stabilisation and give examples of singularities where this method does not work. We conjecture that they are in fact stably degenerate, that is not stably equivalent to non-degenerate functions.We review the various non-degeneracy concepts in the literature. For finite characteristic, we conjecture that there are no wild vanishing cycles for non-degenerate singularities. This implies that the simplest example of singularities with finite Milnor number, $$x^p+x^q$$ x p + x q in characteristic p, is not stably equivalent to a non-degenerate function. We argue that irreducible plane curves with an arbitrary number of Puiseux pairs (in characteristic zero) are stably non-degenerate. As the stabilisation involves many variables, it becomes very difficult to determine the Newton diagram in general, but the form of the equations indicates that the defining functions are non-degenerate.

scholarly journals Finite groups of units of finite characteristic rings

2017 ◽  
Vol 197 (3) ◽  
pp. 661-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilaria Del Corso ◽  
Roberto Dvornicich
Keyword(s):  
Finite Groups ◽  
Finite Characteristic

Kernels with only a finite number of characteristic values

1971 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-262
Author(s):  
Dale W. Swann
Keyword(s):  
Finite Number ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Complex Numbers ◽  
Finite Characteristic ◽  
Characteristic Values ◽  
Image Position ◽  
Complex Valued

Let K(s, t) be a complex-valued L2 kernel on the square ⋜ s, t ⋜ by which we meanand let {λν}, perhaps empty, be the set of finite characteristic values (f.c.v.) of K(s, t), i.e. complex numbers with which there are associated non-trivial L2 functions øν(s) satisfyingFor such kernels, the iterated kernels,are well-defined (1), as are the higher order tracesCarleman(2) showed that the f.c.v. of K are the zeros of the modified Fredhoim determinantthe latter expression holding only for |λ| sufficiently small (3). The δn in (3) may be calculated, at least in theory, by well-known formulae involving the higher order traces (1). For our later analysis of this case, we define and , respectively, as the minimum and maximum moduli of the zeros of , the nth section of D*(K, λ).

Extensions of the Lewis system S5

1951 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schiller Joe Scroggs
Keyword(s):  
Broad Class ◽  
Characteristic Matrix ◽  
Normal Extension ◽  
Strict Implication ◽  
Finite Characteristic ◽  
Material Implication ◽  
Sentential Calculus ◽  
The Third ◽  
Simple Class ◽  
Definition Of

Dugundji has proved that none of the Lewis systems of modal logic, S1 through S5, has a finite characteristic matrix. The question arises whether there exist proper extensions of S5 which have no finite characteristic matrix. By an extension of a sentential calculus S, we usually refer to any system S′ such that every formula provable in S is provable in S′. An extension S′ of S is called proper if it is not identical with S. The answer to the question is trivially affirmative in case we make no additional restrictions on the class of extensions. Thus the extension of S5 obtained by adding to the provable formulas the additional formula p has no finite characteristic matrix (indeed, it has no characteristic matrix at all), but this extension is not closed under substitution—the formula q is not provable in it. McKinsey and Tarski have defined normal extensions of S4* by imposing three conditions. Normal extensions must be closed under substitution, must preserve the rule of detachment under material implication, and must also preserve the rule that if α is provable then ~◊~α is provable. McKinsey and Tarski also gave an example of an extension of S4 which satisfies the first two of these conditions but not the third. One of the results of this paper is that every extension of S5 which satisfies the first two of these conditions also satisfies the third, and hence the above definition of normal extension is redundant for S5. We shall therefore limit the extensions discussed in this paper to those which are closed under substitution and which preserve the rule of detachment under material implication. These extensions we shall call quasi-normal. The class of quasi-normal extensions of S5 is a very broad class and actually includes all extensions which are likely to prove interesting. It is easily shown that quasi-normal extensions of S5 preserve the rules of replacement, adjunction, and detachment under strict implication. It is the purpose of this paper to prove that every proper quasi-normal extension of S5 has a finite characteristic matrix and that every quasi-normal extension of S5 is a normal extension of S5 and to describe a simple class of characteristic matrices for S5.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document