So, on Wednesday, I gave a talk with the above title at IAS, about work in progress with Tom Braden, Tony Licata, and Nick Proudfoot. I was hoping to get David Nadler to blog it for me, but he was *ahem* indisposed. Failing that, I’ll direct you all to David Ben-Zvi’s notes (warning: freaking huge PDF). Hopefully, that will whet your appetite for the forthcoming paper.

## 6 thoughts on “Hypertoric varieties and Koszul duality”

Comments are closed.

oh that’s sad. I was looking forward to David’s liveblogging.

Let me also advertise my set of notes on the same subject, which have the advantage of not being hand written by BZ:

first let me say I have much smaller tiff files for those who like

them (should I be putting those online in addition? not sure

how popular those are).

Since Navid Zadler was indisposed let me comment that the talk KICKED ASS.

Besides the charming Webster wit and attitude for which

this blog is such an excellent showcase, the math was also top notch.

Besides having intrinsically fascinating results,

it seems that Tom, Tony, Nick and Ben are on the cutting

edge of the next “mirror symmetry” revolution.

Intrilligator and Seiberg

introduced an analogue of mirror symmetry for

THREE-dimensional (N=4) superconformal field theories, which has

yet to have the huge mathematical impact it is bound to have.

Gaiotto and Witten are using it to understand the universe

(by which I mean in particular Langlands functoriality – see some of my Witten lecture notes if you can stomach the handwriting and filesize), and

this gang have found it independently and can

teach the physicists a thing or two about it as well – this

physical duality is still very mysterious (since it involves

flowing understood theories to their ill-understood conformal

limits) and so the math can provide a guiding light.

Exciting times!

Wow. After a glowing testimonial like that, I feel I should add: I’m available for birthdays, weddings, AND bar mitzvahs.

Thanks for those pdf notes! Is the Cayley graph for the Deligne groupoid of the triangle right? It looks like it has an extra double edge.

Yeah, you’re right. The vertical edges connecting the top node to the center one shouldn’t be there.