No abstract uploaded!

In this paper, we show the equivalence between two seemingly distinct 2d TQFTs: one comes from the "Coulomb branch index" of the class S theory T[Σ,G] on L(k,1)×S1, the other is the LG "equivariant Verlinde formula", or equivalently partition function of LGℂ complex Chern-Simons theory on Σ×S1. We first derive this equivalence using the M-theory geometry and show that the gauge groups appearing on the two sides are naturally G and its Langlands dual LG. When G is not simply-connected, we provide a recipe of computing the index of T[Σ,G] as summation over indices of T[Σ,G̃ ] with non-trivial background 't Hooft fluxes, where G̃ is the simply-connected group with the same Lie algebra. Then we check explicitly this relation between the Coulomb index and the equivariant Verlinde formula for G=SU(2) or SO(3). In the end, as an application of this newly found relation, we consider the more general case where G is SU(N) or PSU(N) and show that equivariant Verlinde algebra can be derived using field theory via (generalized) Argyres-Seiberg duality. We also attach a Mathematica notebook that can be used to compute the SU(3) equivariant Verlinde coefficients.

One of the fundamental questions in CR geometry is: Given two strongly pseudoconvex CR manifolds X1 and X2 of dimension 2n􀀀 1, is there a non-constant CR morphism between them? In this paper, we use Kohn{Rossi cohomology to show the non-existence of non-constant CR morphism between such two CR manifolds. Specically, if dimHp;q KR(X1) < dimHp;q KR(X2) for any (p; q) with 1  q  n 􀀀 2, then there is no non-constant CR morphism from X1 to X2.

In this note, we will discuss how to relate an operator ideal on Banach spaces to the sequential structures it defines. Concrete examples of ideals of compact, weakly compact, completely continuous, Banach-Saks and weakly Banach-Saks operators will be demonstrated.

Many years ago, SY Cheng, P. Li and myself [1] gave an estimate of the heat kernel for the Laplacian. This was later improved by P. Li and myself in [2]. The key point of this later paper was a parabolic Harnack inequality that generalized an elliptic Harnack inequality that I developed more than twenty years ago.