Spherical space forms - Homotopy self-equivalences and homotopy types, the case of the groups Z/a x (Z/b x TL(2)(F(p)))

Let G = Z/a x(mu) (Z/b x TL(2)(F(p))) and X(n) be an n-dimensional CW-complex with the homotopy type of the n-sphere. We determine the automorphism group Aut(G) and then compute the number of distinct homotopy types of spherical space forms with respect to free and cellular G-actions on all CW-complexes X(2dn - 1), where 2d is a period of G. Next, the group E(X(2dn - 1)/alpha) of homotopy self-equivalences of spherical space forms X(2dn - 1)/alpha, associated with such G-actions alpha on X(2dn - 1) are studied. Similar results for the rest of finite periodic groups have been obtained recently and they are described in the introduction. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Maximal Subgroups of Compact Lie Groups

This report aims at giving a general overview on the classification of the maximal subgroups of compact Lie groups (not necessarily connected). In the first part, it is shown that these fall naturally into three types: (1) those of trivial type, which are simply defined as inverse images of maximal subgroups of the corresponding component group under the canonical projection and whose classification constitutes a problem in finite group theory, (2) those of normal type, whose connected one-component is a normal subgroup, and (3) those of normalizer type, which are the normalizers of their own connected one-component. It is also shown how to reduce the classification of maximal subgroups of the last two types to: (2) the classification of the finite maximal Sigma-invariant subgroups of centerfree connected compact simple Lie groups and (3) the classification of the Sigma-primitive subalgebras of compact simple Lie algebras, where Sigma is a subgroup of the corresponding outer automorphism group. In the second part, we explicitly compute the normalizers of the primitive subalgebras of the compact classical Lie algebras (in the corresponding classical groups), thus arriving at the complete classification of all (non-discrete) maximal subgroups of the compact classical Lie groups.

Experimenting with infinite groups, I

A group is termed parafree if it is residually nilpotent and has the same nilpotent quotients as a given free group. Since free groups are residually nilpotent, they are parafree. Nonfree parafree groups abound and they all have many properties in common with free groups. Finitely presented parafree groups have solvable word problems, but little is known about the conjugacy and isomorphism problems. The conjugacy problem plays an important part in determining whether an automorphism is inner, which we term the inner automorphism problem. We will attack these and other problems about parafree groups experimentally, in a series of papers, of which this is the first and which is concerned with the isomorphism problem. The approach that we take here is to distinguish some parafree groups by computing the number of epimorphisms onto selected finite groups. It turns out, rather unexpectedly, that an understanding of the quotients of certain groups leads to some new results about equations in free and relatively free groups. We touch on this only lightly here but will discuss this in more depth in a future paper.

The Automorphism Group of the Free Algebra of Rank Two

The theorem of Czerniakiewicz and Makar-Limanov, that all the automorphisms of a free algebra of rank two are tame is proved here by showing that the group of these automorphisms is the free product of two groups (amalgamating their intersection), the group of all affine automorphisms and the group of all triangular automorphisms. The method consists in finding a bipolar structure. As a consequence every finite subgroup of automorphisms (in characteristic zero) is shown to be conjugate to a group of linear automorphisms.

Working in groups

This chapter is a condensation of a guide written by the chapter authors for both university teachers and students (Fowler et al., 2006). All page references given in this chapter are to this guide, unless otherwise stated. University students often work in groups. It may be a formal group (i.e. one that has been formed for a group presentation, writing a report, or completing a project) or an informal group (i.e. some students have decided to form a study group or undertake research together). Whether formal or informal, this chapter aims to make working in groups easier for you. Health care professionals also often work in groups. Yes, working in groups will extend well beyond your time at university. In fact, the skills and abilities to work effectively in groups are some of the most sought-after attributes in health care professionals. It seems obvious, then, that taking the opportunity to develop and enhance your skills and abilities for working in groups is a wise choice.

A comparison of the hazard perception ability of matched groups of healthy drivers aged 35 to 55, 65 to 74, and 75 to 84 years

We examined differences in response latencies obtained during a validated video-based hazard perception driving test between three healthy, community-dwelling groups: 22 mid-aged (35-55 years), 34 young-old (65-74 years), and 23 old-old (75-84 years) current drivers, matched for gender, education level, and vocabulary. We found no significant difference in performance between mid-aged and young-old groups, but the old-old group was significantly slower than the other two groups. The differences between the old-old group and the other groups combined were independently mediated by useful field of view (UFOV), contrast sensitivity, and simple reaction time measures. Given that hazard perception latency has been linked with increased crash risk, these results are consistent with the idea that increased crash risk in older adults could be a function of poorer hazard perception, though this decline does not appear to manifest until age 75+ in healthy drivers.