Search

Motivated by the Ax-Kochen/Ershov principle, a large number of questions about henselian valued fields have been shown to reduce to analogous questions about the value group and residue field. In this paper, we investigate the burden of henselian valued fields in the three-sorted Denef-Pas language. If $T$ is a theory of henselian valued fields admitting relative quantifier elimination (in any characteristic), we show that the burden of $T$ is equal to the sum of the burdens of its value group and residue field. As a consequence, $T$ is NTP${}_2$ if and only if its residue field and value group are; the same is true for the statements "$T$ is strong" and "$T$ has finite burden.", Comment: 15 pages, based on results from a chapter of the author's thesis, under the supervision of Professor Deirdre Haskell

We consider two overlapping classes of fields, IAC and VAC, which are defined using valuation theory but which do not involve a distinguished valuation. Rather, each class is defined by a condition that quantifies over all possible valuations on the field. In his thesis, Hong asked whether these two classes are equal (Hong, 2013, Question 5.6.8). In this paper, we give an example that negatively answers Hong's question. We also explore several situations in which the equivalence does hold with an additional assumption, including the case where every $K'\equiv K$ is IAC., Comment: 12 pages, based on results from a chapter of the author's thesis, under the supervision of Professor Deirdre Haskell

The goal of this paper is to generalise Alex Rennet's proof of the non-axiomatizability of the class of pseudo-o-minimal structures. Rennet showed that if L is an expansion of the language of ordered fields and K is the class of pseudo-o-minimal L-structures (L-structures elementarily equivalent to an ultraproduct of o-minimal structures) then K is not computably axiomatizable. We give a general version of this theorem, and apply it to several classes of topological structures., Comment: 5 pages

The paper examines the social structure of Canada's agricultural production. It argues that "the official development strategy is typical of state involvement in maturing capitalist economies and that, in so far as these policies are successful, they bring to an end small scale production of primary products by absorbing rural people into an industrial capitalist society". In 1961, the Federal government initiated an agricultural rehabilitation and development programme. Later the legislation was expanded to include the whole question of regional development. A detailed breakdown of farms by economic class in 1971 indicated that the petit bourgeoisie, although still dominant in numbers, was economically dominated by a small group of large capitalist enterprises, although there was much variation by region and type of product. This relative weakness of the petit bourgeois system of production resulted in rural poverty and regional depopulation. Large scale, technically sophisticated industry, located in the major urban markets, had made small manufacturing uncompetitive, even in its local markets. In order to provide for their families, many of the poorest farmers migrated to more rewarding urban employment. In so far as they are successful, the government policies on rural and regional development in Canada have actually sped up this process. (NQ)