Guide to the Lalitha Chandrasekhar Papers 1920-2013

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

University of Chicago Library Guide to the Lalitha Chandrasekhar Papers 1920-2013 © 2018 University of Chicago Library Table of Contents Descriptive Summary 3 Information on Use 3 Access 3 Citation 3 Biographical Note 4 Scope Note 6 Related Resources 8 Subject Headings 8 INVENTORY 8 Series I: Personal 8 Series II: Correspondence 43 Series III: Diaries and Chronological files 78 Subseries 1: General files 78 Subseries 2: Card file boxes 92 Series IV: Writing 93 Subseries 1: Essays 94 Subseries 2: Talks 102 Subseries 3: Notes 103 Series V: Politics and Social Justice 112 Series VI: Writings by Others 119 Subseries 1: Writings by and about S. Chandrasekhar 120 Subseries 2: Articles and booklets 122 Subseries 3: Periodicals, reports, and compilations 125 Series VII: Audiovisual 135 Subseries 1: Photographic material 135 Subseries 2: Audio and video 148 Series VIII: Oversize 150 Series IX: Artifacts and Framed Items 180 Series X: Restricted 182 Subseries 1: Financial records 183 Subseries 2: Student records 185 Descriptive Summary Identifier ICU.SPCL.CHANDRASEKHARL Title Chandrasekhar, Lalitha. Papers Date 1920-2013 Size 169.25 linear feet (214 boxes, 2 objects) Repository Special Collections Research Center University of Chicago Library 1100 East 57th Street Chicago, Illinois 60637 U.S.A. Abstract Lalitha Chandrasekhar (1910-2013) was married to Nobel Prize winning astrophysicist and longtime University of Chicago professor Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar. She was born in Madras, India and spent much of her childhood there. The Chandrasekhars moved to Williams Bay, Wisconsin in late 1936 when he accepted a position at the University of Chicago's Yerkes Observatory. They remained there until 1964, when they moved to Chicago. The Lalitha Chandrasekhar Papers document her life in Williams Bay and Chicago and her travels, mostly in India, the United States, and Europe. They contain personal material such as ephemera from arts organizations and extensive clippings files; correspondence; detailed diaries and chronological files; writing, including essays and notes for talks; material documenting her involvement with progressive political campaigns and contributions to organizations promoting various social justice causes; photographs, negatives, and a small amount of other audiovisual material; and miscellaneous artifacts and framed items. Information on Use Access The collection is open for research, with the exception of Series X, which contains material to which access is restricted. Subseries 1 contains financial material that is restricted for 50 years from the record’s date of creation. Subseries 2 contains student material that is restricted for 80 years from the record’s date of creation. The audio and video recordings in Series VII do not contain access copies. Researchers should consult with staff before requesting this material. Citation 3 When quoting material from this collection, the preferred citation is: Chandrasekhar, Lalitha. Papers, [Box #, Folder #], Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library Biographical Note Lalitha Chandrasekhar was born Doraiswamy Lalithambal in Madras, India in 1910. Her actual day of birth was September 28, but due to a clerical early in her childhood she was officially assigned the birthday of October 15, and she continued to celebrate that day as her birthday for the rest of her life. She was the third of four daughters of Savitri and S. Doraiswamy – her older sisters were Kanthamani and Shantha, and her younger sister was Radha. Lalitha spent much of her childhood in Madras as part of a joint family unit, surrounded by grandparents, aunts, and cousins from her mother’s side of the family. Her father was a medical officer in the Indian Army and served in the first world war, so he was away for much of her childhood. Lalitha’s mother was one of five daughters, and Lalitha’s aunts Subbalakshmi, Balam, Swarnam and Nithya played important roles in Lalitha’s life. After her father returned from the war, Lalitha, her parents, and her sister Shantha spent a short amount of time in Bangalore, where her father was stationed at an army hospital. However, her parents were concerned about her education, and she soon returned to Madras to continue with school. A short time later, her father passed away as a result of injuries suffered during the war, and the family returned to Madras and first settled back at the family home, known as Ananda Villas. As a result of her husband’s death from war injuries, Lalitha’s mother was given a pension and financial assistance for her children’s education. Some time later, she used money from the pension to purchase a home in Mylapore, which she called Sri Villas. After renting it out for a few years, the extended family moved there. They later built and moved to a larger set of homes, which they called “The Colony,” nearby. Lalitha’s family valued education greatly, and she began attending school at the age of three. Her family’s focus on formal education for women was unique for the time and originated in the experiences of her oldest aunt, Subbalakshmi, who was widowed at a very young age. Instead of following the traditional customs of the time for young widows, Lalitha’s grandparents chose to go to great lengths to see that Subbalakshmi was able to pursue an education. She ultimately graduated from college and subsequently worked to support young widows and promote education for women in Southern India. After Subbalakshmi received a formal education, the pattern continued with her younger sisters and then with the next generation of women in the family, which included Lalitha and her sisters. In 1931, Lalitha completed a BA Honours in Physics at Presidency College in Madras. In an autobiographical essay (“Little Sister: Part II”) she writes that her interest in physics was inspired by two main two sources – the excitement in India over the awarding of the Noble Prize to C.V. Raman and her interest in the scientist Marie Curie. Her family background and the atmosphere in which she grew up also encouraged her to enter a field that was not traditionally available to women. After graduating, she wanted very much to go to England to continue her studies. 4 However, her mother would not agree to this, so she remained in India and completed an LT (teaching degree) from the University of Madras and Lady Willingdon Training College in 1932. She spent the next few years teaching at various institutions, including National High School at Mylapore, Madras, where she taught physics, chemistry, math, and physical education and Lady Hardinge Medical College in New Delhi, where she taught physics. She spent a short time working in a scientific lab at Presidency College and earned a Master’s Degree in Physics in 1934, and then became headmistress of a middle school at Karaikindi. In 1935, she began working in a lab at the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore. On September 11, 1936, Lalitha married Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, known as Chandra. They had met years earlier when both were physics students at Presidency College and continued their correspondence from 1930-1936 while he spent six years in Europe, mostly at Cambridge University. After their marriage, they spent a short time in England and then moved to Williams Bay, Wisconsin, where Chandra had accepted a position at the University of Chicago’s Yerkes Observatory. The Chandrasekhars lived in Williams Bay until 1964, when they moved to Chicago. Chandra remained at the University of Chicago for his entire career, where he was a highly respected theoretical astrophysicist. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1983. For the first few years she was in Williams Bay, Lalitha attended lectures given by her husband and other scientists at Yerkes Observatory. However, after a few years she gave up her scientific studies. She felt that they would not be fruitful if she was only able to attend to them on a part- time basis, and her highest priority was to support her husband in his scientific career. For the nearly sixty years of her married life, Lalitha took primary responsibility for managing the Chandrasekhar household so her husband could focus on his academic work. Lalitha also developed her own interests and pursuits and made her own contributions to the communities she was a part of. In an effort to correct stereotypes and misperceptions about India that she often encountered in America, she traveled around the Williams Bay area and gave lectures on India to local women’s groups, schools, and church groups, covering topics such as music, history, political and economic conditions, and culture. In addition to lecturing, she would often sing or perform on the veena, an Indian musical instrument. In the 1950s she was also involved in the American Association of University Women and various local book discussion groups. In the early 1950s, Lalitha became a member of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin and began to devote significant efforts to supporting this cause. She collected donations, made telephone calls, knocked on doors, attended rallies, and distributed campaign material on behalf of the candidates she supported. Her enthusiasm for Adlai Stevenson, the Democratic candidate for President in 1952 and 1956, played a large role in the Chandrasekhars’ decision to become American citizens, which they did on October 13, 1953. Her active involvement with the Democratic Party lessened after the 1950s, but she was a lifelong supporter of progressive causes. After the Chandrasekhars moved to Chicago, she became involved in the Civic Disarmament 5 Committee and League of Women Voters, continued to support select political candidates, took art classes, and refocused her efforts on her writing. She continued to provide financial support to progressive political candidates and organizations that promoted social justice issues for the rest of her life.
Recommended publications
  • R Mathematics Esearch Eports

    R Mathematics Esearch Eports

    Mathematics r research reports M r Boris Hasselblatt, Svetlana Katok, Michele Benzi, Dmitry Burago, Alessandra Celletti, Tobias Holck Colding, Brian Conrey, Josselin Garnier, Timothy Gowers, Robert Griess, Linus Kramer, Barry Mazur, Walter Neumann, Alexander Olshanskii, Christopher Sogge, Benjamin Sudakov, Hugh Woodin, Yuri Zarhin, Tamar Ziegler Editorial Volume 1 (2020), p. 1-3. <http://mrr.centre-mersenne.org/item/MRR_2020__1__1_0> © The journal and the authors, 2020. Some rights reserved. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Mathematics Research Reports is member of the Centre Mersenne for Open Scientific Publishing www.centre-mersenne.org Mathema tics research reports Volume 1 (2020), 1–3 Editorial This is the inaugural volume of Mathematics Research Reports, a journal owned by mathematicians, and dedicated to the principles of fair open access and academic self- determination. Articles in Mathematics Research Reports are freely available for a world-wide audi- ence, with no author publication charges (diamond open access) but high production value, thanks to financial support from the Anatole Katok Center for Dynamical Sys- tems and Geometry at the Pennsylvania State University and to the infrastructure of the Centre Mersenne. The articles in MRR are research announcements of significant ad- vances in all branches of mathematics, short complete papers of original research (up to about 15 journal pages), and review articles (up to about 30 journal pages). They communicate their contents to a broad mathematical audience and should meet high standards for mathematical content and clarity. The entire Editorial Board approves the acceptance of any paper for publication, and appointments to the board are made by the board itself.
  • August 3, 2020 Dr. Robert Zimmer President University of Chicago

    August 3, 2020 Dr. Robert Zimmer President University of Chicago

    August 3, 2020 Dr. Robert Zimmer President University of Chicago 5801 South Ellis Ave., Suite 501 Chicago, Illinois 60637 Dear Dr. Zimmer: We write to further understand the effects of adversarial foreign direct investment in the U.S. higher education system.1 Under Secretary Betsy DeVos’s leadership, the Department of Education (Department) has sought to improve transparency and reduce reliance on foreign investment by actively enforcing Section 117 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, which requires colleges and universities to disclose contracts with, and gifts from, any foreign source of over $250,000 to the Department.2 To date, the Department has uncovered over $6.5 billion of previously unreported foreign donations to U.S. Institutes of Higher Education (IHE).3 On May 20, 2020, the Department briefed the Oversight Committee about this apparent lack of transparency in reporting as required by the law. The Department also raised concerns about this level of IHEs dependency on foreign funding from adversarial states and the inherent national security risks.4 Through the efforts of the Department, the Committee learned that many countries use donation agreements or contracts (agreements) with IHEs, professors, or researchers (recipients) to leverage their money into some type of benefit, or quid pro quo.5 This benefit can materialize in different ways. For example, Qatar deems all its donations to recipients to be “strategic” and “trade secrets” and precludes the recipient from disclosing the amount or purpose of the donation.6 Furthermore, some countries place clauses in their agreements granting them first right of refusal before the recipient publishes or sells any work product.7 Finally and most concerning, some recipients alter their decision making based on the donations received.8 During the briefing, the Department informed the Committee that after reports the COVID-19 pandemic may be the result of negligence in a lab in Wuhan, China, two universities that have 1 Letter from Jim D.
  • Chicago Physics One

    Chicago Physics One

    CHICAGO PHYSICS ONE 3:25 P.M. December 02, 1942 “All of us... knew that with the advent of the chain reaction, the world would never be the same again.” former UChicago physicist Samuel K. Allison Physics at the University of Chicago has a remarkable history. From Albert Michelson, appointed by our first president William Rainey Harper as the founding head of the physics department and subsequently the first American to win a Nobel Prize in the sciences, through the mid-20th century work led by Enrico Fermi, and onto the extraordinary work being done in the department today, the department has been a constant source of imagination, discovery, and scientific transformation. In both its research and its education at all levels, the Department of Physics instantiates the highest aspirations and values of the University of Chicago. Robert J. Zimmer President, University of Chicago Welcome to the inaugural issue of Chicago Physics! We are proud to present the first issue of Chicago Physics – an annual newsletter that we hope will keep you connected with the Department of Physics at the University of Chicago. This newsletter will introduce to you some of our students, postdocs and staff as well as new members of our faculty. We will share with you good news about successes and recognition and also convey the sad news about the passing of members of our community. You will learn about the ongoing research activities in the Department and about events that took place in the previous year. We hope that you will become involved in the upcoming events that will be announced.
  • Inside • Academe Vol

    Inside • Academe Vol

    Inside • Academe Vol. XXIII • No. 1 • 2017–2018 A publication of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni In This Issue… ATHENA Roundtable 2017 Restoring Excellence: st 2 In Box Ideas that Work for 21 Century College Leadership New ACTA Board Member: CTA’s 2017 ATHENA Roundtable of Expression at Yale, began the discussion. Edwin Williamson A conference, “Restoring Excellence: He drew a thought-provoking comparison Ideas that Work for 21st Century College between scientific method and the state of 3 ACTA in the News ACTA Releases 2017–2018 Leadership,” is our largest conference to date. intellectual engagement on campus: Scientific What Will They Learn?™ The event, held on discovery begins College Ratings October 20 in Wash- with the skepticism ington, DC, brought of experts and in- From the Bookshelf together innovators volves meticulously 4 Effective Trusteeship in higher education evaluating data to ACTA’s Guide on Controlling and leading scholars test a hypothesis. Costs: A Catalyst for Change to address the con- So also students tinuing challenges must be taught to 5 Heard on Campus facing campuses na- understand that 7 President Robert Zimmer tionwide. engaging opposing Receives Merrill Award ACTA’s board viewpoints leads to chair, Robert Lewit, intellectual enlight- 8 Merrill Award Winner welcomed the confer- enment and the Featured in New York Times ence audience, and discovery of new, President Michael 9 Academic Renewal stronger positions. A New Oasis of Excellence at Poliakoff opened the Allison Stanger, Trinity College first session: “A Gal- professor of politics vanizing Year for Free and economics at FAR Helps Create a Unique Dillard University President Walter Kimbrough speaks at ATHENA.
  • Department of Mathematics 1

    Department of Mathematics 1

    Department of Mathematics 1 Department of Mathematics Chair • Shmuel Weinberger Professors • Laszlo Babai, Computer Science and Mathematics • Guillaume Bal, Statistics and Mathematics • Alexander A. Beilinson • Danny Calegari • Francesco Calegari • Kevin Corlette • Marianna Csörnyei • Vladimir Drinfeld • Todd Dupont, Computer Science and Mathematics • Matthew Emerton • Alex Eskin • Benson Farb • Robert A. Fefferman • Victor Ginzburg • Denis Hirschfeldt • Kazuya Kato • Carlos E. Kenig • Gregory Lawler, Mathematics and Statistics • Maryanthe Malliaris • J. Peter May • Andre Neves • Bao Châu Ngô • Madhav Vithal Nori • Alexander Razborov, Mathematics and Computer Science • Luis Silvestre • Charles Smart • Panagiotis Souganidis • Sidney Webster • Shmuel Weinberger • Amie Wilkinson • Robert Zimmer Associate Professors • Simion Filip • Ewain Gwynne Assistant Professors • Sebastian Hurtado-Salazar • Dana Mendelson • Nikita Rozenblyum • Daniil Rudenko Instructors • Lucas Benigni • Guher Camliyurt • Stephen Cantrell • Elliot Cartee • Mark Cerenzia 2 Department of Mathematics • Andrea Dotto • Mikolaj Fraczyk • Pedro Gasper • Kornelia Hera • Trevor Hyde • Kasia Jankiewicz • Justin Lanier • Brian Lawrence • Zhilin Luo • Akhil Mathew • Henrik Matthieson • Cornelia Mihaila • Lucia Mocz • Benedict Morrissey • Davi Obata • Lue Pan • Wenyu Pan • Beniada Shabani • Danny Shi • Daniel Stern • Ao Sun • Xuan Wu • Zihui Zhao • Jinping Zhuge Senior Lecturers • John Boller • Lucas Culler • Jitka Stehnova • Sarah Ziesler Lecturer • Meghan Anderson Assistant Instructional
  • The Way Forward: Educational Leadership and Strategic Capital By

    The Way Forward: Educational Leadership and Strategic Capital By

    The Way Forward: Educational Leadership and Strategic Capital by K. Page Boyer A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education (Educational Leadership) at the University of Michigan-Dearborn 2016 Doctoral Committee: Professor Bonnie M. Beyer, Chair LEO Lecturer II John Burl Artis Professor M. Robert Fraser Copyright 2016 by K. Page Boyer All Rights Reserved i Dedication To my family “To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge.” ~ Nicolaus Copernicus ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. Bonnie M. Beyer, Chair of my dissertation committee, for her probity and guidance concerning theories of school administration and leadership, organizational theory and development, educational law, legal and regulatory issues in educational administration, and curriculum deliberation and development. Thank you to Dr. John Burl Artis for his deep knowledge, political sentience, and keen sense of humor concerning all facets of educational leadership. Thank you to Dr. M. Robert Fraser for his rigorous theoretical challenges and intellectual acuity concerning the history of Christianity and Christian Thought and how both pertain to teaching and learning in America’s colleges and universities today. I am indebted to Baker Library at Dartmouth College, Regenstein Library at The University of Chicago, the Widener and Houghton Libraries at Harvard University, and the Hatcher Graduate Library at the University of Michigan for their stewardship of inestimably valuable resources. Finally, I want to thank my family for their enduring faith, hope, and love, united with a formidable sense of humor, passion, optimism, and a prodigious ability to dream.
  • Commensurated Subgroups of Arithmetic Groups, Totally

    Commensurated Subgroups of Arithmetic Groups, Totally

    COMMENSURATED SUBGROUPS OF ARITHMETIC GROUPS, TOTALLY DISCONNECTED GROUPS AND ADELIC RIGIDITY YEHUDA SHALOM AND GEORGE A. WILLIS 1. Introduction The Margulis-Zimmer conjecture. The subject of this paper is a well known ques- tion advertised by Gregory Margulis and Robert Zimmer since the late 1970’s, which seeks refinement of the celebrated Normal Subgroup Theorem of Margulis (hereafter abbreviated NST). Although Margulis’ NST is stated and proved in the context of (higher rank) irreducible lattices in products of simple algebraic groups over local fields, by Margulis’ arithmeticity theorem we may and shall work solely in the framework of (S-)arithmetic groups. One departure point for the Margulis-Zimmer conjecture is the phenomenon that while all higher rank S-arithmetic groups are uniformly treated by the NST, there is a notable difference in the structure of subgroups which are commensu- rated, rather than normalized, by the ambient arithmetic group. For example, the group 1 SLn(Z[ p ]) commensurates its subgroup SLn(Z), while the latter commensurates no ap- parent infinite, infinite index subgroup of its own. The obvious generalization of this example, which by Margulis arithmeticity theorem and with the aid of the restriction of scalars functor is the most general one, goes as follows: Definition 1.1. Let K be a global field, its ring of integers, and let G be an ab- solutely simple, simply connected algebraicO group defined over K. Let V be the set of all inequivalent valuations on K, and let V ∞ V denote the archimedean ones. For a subset V ∞ S V , let K be, as usual,⊂ the ring of S-integers in K, and let ⊆ ⊆ OS ⊆ Γ < G(K) be an S-arithmetic group, namely, a subgroup commensurable with G( S).
  • Some Thoughts on Undergraduate Education for Highly Selective Universities

    Some Thoughts on Undergraduate Education for Highly Selective Universities

    Some Thoughts on Undergraduate Education for Highly Selective Universities Jonathan R. Cole Columbia University “In the beginning, there was Hopkins” A Very Special Place: The First Major Research University (1876) “It is one of the noblest duties of a university to advance knowledge, and to diffuse it not merely among those who can attend the daily lectures but far and wide.” Daniel Coit Gilman “Our history shows that our commitment to bold experimentation did not pass with our founding. It’s at the core of who we are.” “Be vigorous, bold, and smart in championing the truths you have discovered and hold dear.” Ronald Daniels Hopkins in historical and social context ■ Roughly 7,000 colleges and universities in the United States ■ Only somewhat over 100 highly intensive research universities ■ Different strokes for different folks ■ Curriculum should dovetail well with the identity of the university and represent a realization of its basic principles and goals ■ Hopkins Mission Statement: “The mission of the Johns Hopkins University is to educate its students and cultivate for lifelong learning, to foster independent and original research, and to bring the benefits of discovery to the world” Getting In and the Curriculum: Shaping a class ■ Bringing the faculty back in ■ The quest for the quirky and diversity of every kind ■ How this is linked to the curriculum Implications : • Who studies history today? • Foreign languages? • Do the subalterns speak to our students? • Is the C.P. Snow’s Two Cultur e s divide between the sciences and the
  • Michael Reese Hospital Site Tech Park Advisory Panel Report

    Michael Reese Hospital Site Tech Park Advisory Panel Report

    MICHAEL REESE HOSPITAL SITE TECH PARK ADVISORY PANEL MichAel reese hosPital siTe Tech PArk AdvisorY PAnel rePorT MAY 2011 1 MICHAEL REESE HOSPITAL SITE TECH PARK ADVISORY PANEL The transformation of the former Michael Reese Hospital site into a world-class technology park on the South Side lakefront will elevate Chicago as a globally competitive, high-tech city, while at the same time contribute to the growth and economic prosperity of the local community, city, county and state. 1 MICHAEL REESE HOSPITAL SITE TECH PARK ADVISORY PANEL Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men’s blood and probably themselves will not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die, but long after we are gone will be a living thing, asserting itselfwith ever-growing insistency. Remember that our sons and grandsons are going to do things that would stagger us. Let your watchword be order and your beacon beauty. Think big. Daniel Hudson Burnham, Chicago architect. (1846-1912) As we carry out our long-term strategy to create new jobs throughout Chicago and build an even more modern and diverse economy, we must continue to target emerging business sectors that will be the foundation of economic opportunity in the 21st century. Mayor Richard M. Daley, Announcement of Advisory Panel, December 16, 2010 1 MICHAEL REESE HOSPITAL SITE TECH PARK ADVISORY PANEL Aerial view of entire site 2 ExEcutivE Summary Mission The transformation of the former Michael Reese Hospital site into a world-class technology park on the South Side lakefront will elevate Chicago as a globally competitive, high-tech city, while at the same time contribute to the growth and economic prosperity of the local community, city, county and state.
  • Fermilab- Uchicago Connections

    Fermilab- Uchicago Connections

    Fermilab- UChicago Connections Pushpa Bhat (Fermilab) Fermi50 @ University of Chicago 31 October 2017 1 10/31/17 Pushpa Bhat | Fermi50 @ UChicago The National Accelerator Laboratory created in 1967, renamed Fermilab in 1974, opened a new frontier in the exploration of matter and energy. Given a rich tradition in physics and the legacy of legendary physicists … Michelson, Millikan, Compton,.. to Fermi and beyond, it should be no surprise that the University of Chicago would have strong influence on this frontier laboratory in the suburbs of Chicago. 2 10/31/17 Pushpa Bhat | Fermi50 @ UChicago Strong and sustained connections UChicago’s connections with Fermilab dates back to the beginning of the Lab: UChicago was one of the charter members of the Universities Research Association (URA) in 1967. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) mentions the proximity of many excellent universities in the mid-west including UChicago as one of the reasons to select the Weston site. George Beadle, the President of UChicago (1961-68) had a committee (1967) on relationships between UChicago and NAL. Throughout the past decades, many Fermilab scientists have had joint appointments with UChicago, including our first director, Bob Wilson. Faculty at UChicago have held high positions at the Lab and have influenced the research program at the Lab. 3 10/31/17 Pushpa Bhat | Fermi50 @ UChicago Transfer of Title for NAL site to AEC The State of Illinois purchased the 6800 acre Weston site in Dec. 1966 and transferred the title to AEC on April 10, 1969. The
  • Compact Lorentz Manifolds with Local Symmetry

    Compact Lorentz Manifolds with Local Symmetry

    Compact Lorentz manifolds with local symmetry Karin Melnick October 20, 2006 1 1 Acknowledgements First I would like to thank my advisor, Benson Farb, for his guidance, inspi- ration, and encouragement. Working with him has been a great pleasure for which I am deeply grateful. He is a remarkable source of ideas, and I benefitted from his knowledge of a broad range of mathematics. While working on this project, I had many helpful conversations with Abdel- ghani Zeghib. He suggested approaching this problem with Gromov’s theory of rigid geometric structures. His results on codimension-one, totally geodesic, lightlike foliations, among others, play an important role in this work. I was very fortunate to have been exposed to the work of Benson Farb and Shmuel Weinberger on compact aspherical Riemannian manifolds with local symmetry. Their results are of course the fundamental inspiration for this project. I am priveleged to have learned their remarkable new techniques from them. I am grateful in particular for several helpful conversations with my sec- ond advisor, Shmuel Weinberger. I would also like to thank my topic advisor, Robert Zimmer, who first brought my attention to this work. All I learned from him during 2001-2002 continues to influence my thinking about mathematics. Finally, I enjoyed helpful conversations with many others, including Thierry Barbot, Mark Behrens, Bill Goldman, and Ben Wieland. I am particularly grateful to Thierry Barbot for his comments and corrections on a preliminary draft of this thesis. In loving memory of Laura Sue-Jung Kang 2 2 Introduction Two main lines of questioning in the study of automorphism groups of pseudo- Riemmanian manifolds are to ask which groups can act isometrically on pseudo- Riemannian manifolds of a given topological type, and to ask which pseudo- Riemannian manifolds admit an isometric action of a given large group.
  • Reflections, 2016-2021

    Reflections, 2016-2021

    REFLECTIONS, 2016-2021 The Sequel to AN ODYSSEY OF REFORM INITIATIVES, 1986-2015 Frank G. Splitt Copyright 2021 by Frank G, Splitt All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission. Copy editing by Margaret Mangan, Jennifer Heitz, and Judy Janowiak. Photo editing by Jennifer Heitz, Anne Rassas, and Elizabeth Scott. Printed by Copy Cat, 8626 Hwy 51, Minocqua, Wisconsin 54548 and UPS, 119 S. Emerson Avenue, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 Because of changing circumstances and the dynamic nature of the Internet, some Web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since the original publication of the material in this collection and may no longer be valid. Published by FutureVectors, Inc. 710 S. William Street, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 The PDF for this book can be accessed at www.futurevectors.com ISBN 978-1-63901-414-9 DEDICATION This sequel to the Odyssey book is dedicated to the memory of General Andrew Jackson Goodpaster, 1915-2005, a soldier, engineer, and scholar who fought with uncommon valor in World War II, advised several presidents, and came out of retirement to serve as the superintendent of West Point. He is an example of a truly enlightened military intellectual who used his considerable talents in the service of his country. His life story now serves as an inspiration to others who are challenged with the task of resolving complex domestic and foreign policy issues. He is also one of my heroes as well as a second cousin—sharing our Polish great grandmother, Katarzyna Pytlic, the mother of Anna Pytlic Splitt, my paternal .grandmother.