On behalf of the Canadian Mathematical Congress, I wish to thank the University of Toronto for its hospitality, the members of the Local Arrangements Committee (especially Chandler Davis) for the many comforts and pleasures they have provided, and our nine distinguished visitors for the courses of lectures they gave at our Seminar.

Let Sn be the set of n2 points with integer coordinates n (x, y), 1 ≤ x, y <n. Let fn be the maximum cardinal of a subset T of Sn such that no three points of T are collinear. Clearly fn < 2n.

For 2 ≤ n ≤ 10 it is known ([2], [3] for n = 8, [ 1] for n = 10, also [4], [6]) that fn = 2n, and that this bound is attained in 1, 1, 4, 5, 11, 22, 57, 51 and 156 distinct configurations for these nine values of n. On the other hand, P. Erdös [7] has pointed out that if n is prime, fn ≥ n, since the n points (x, x2) reduced modulo n have no three collinear. We give a probabilistic argument to support the conjecture that there is only a finite number of solutions to the no-three-in-line problem. More specifically, we conjecture that

Let Tn denote a tournament of order n, let G(Tn) denote the automorphism group of Tn, let |G| denote the order of the group G, and let g(n) denote the maximum of |G(Tn)| taken over all tournaments Tn of order n. Goldberg and Moon conjectured [2] that for all n≥1 with equality holding if and only if n is a power of 3. In an addendum to [2] it was pointed out that their conjecture is equivalent to the conjecture that if G is any odd order subgroup of Sn, the symmetric group of degree n, then with equality possible if and only if n is a power of 3. The latter conjecture was proved in [1] by John D. Dixon who made use of the Feit-Thompson theorem in his proof. In this paper we avoid use of the Feit-Thompson result and give a combinatorial proof of the Goldberg-Moon conjecture.

We consider the following problem: Let G be a group with distinct automorphisms β and σ and an anti-automorphism α such that

What can be said about G?

If σ = α, σ is both an automorphism and an anti-automorphism so that G is abelian. Hence we assume that σ ≠ α. In this case, we show that G is non-abelian, but has an abelian subgroup of index 2. Conversely, for such a group G there always exist distinct automorphisms β and σ and an anti-automorphism α such that (1) holds.

In [1] Gaschütz has shown that a finite group G splits over an abelian normal subgroup N if its Frattini subgroup ϕ(G) intersects N trivially. When N is a non-abelian nilpotent normal subgroup of G the condition ϕ(G)∩ N = 1 cannot be satisfied: for if N is non-abelian then the commutator subgroup C(N) of N is non-trivial. Now N is nilpotent, whence 1 ≠ C(N)⊂ϕ(N). Since G is a finite group, therefore, by (3, theorem 7.3.17) ϕ⊂ϕ(G). It follows that ϕ(G) ∩ N ≠ 1. Thus the condition ϕ(G) ∩ N = 1 must be modified. In §1 we shall derive some similar type of conditions for G to split over N when the restriction of N being an abelian normal subgroup is removed. In § 2 we shall give a characterization of splitting extensions of N in which every subgroup splits over its intersection with N.

Let G be an undirected graph, without loops or multiple edges. An automorphism of G is a permutation of the vertices of G that preserves adjacency. G is vertex transitive if, given any two vertices of G, there is an automorphism of the graph that maps one to the other. Similarly, G is edge transitive if for any two edges (a, b) and (c, d) of G there exists an automorphism f of G such that {c, d} = {f(a), f(b)}. A graph is regular of degree d if each vertex belongs to exactly d edges.

Let f: A×B → X be a map. Let J(f): ∑(A ∧ B)→ ∑X be the map obtained from f by means of the Hopf construction. Let P(f) denote the space obtained from ∑X by attaching a cone on ∑(A ∧ B) by means of J(f). Let l: ∑X→P(f ) be the inclusion and T(l): X→ΩP(f) the adjoint of l. Let h1,: A1, → A, h2: B1,→ B be maps. Let c:ΩP(f)× ΩP(f) → ΩP(f) be the basic commutator. Then we prove that there exists a map ∑A1 × ∑B1 →P(f) with axes l∑(fi1 h1), l∑(fi2 h2) if and only if , where i1: A→ A × B and i2 B → A × B are the inclusions. This generalizes a result of Hilton. Also, by letting f be an H-space multiplication and h and h the identity maps, we obtain a well known criterion of Stasheff for an H-space to be homotopy-commutative. Finally, appropriate duals of these results are given.

In following a suggestion of S. Chowla to apply a method of C. Hooley [3] to obtain an asymptotic formula for the sum ∑ r(n)r(n+a), where r(n) denotes the number of representations of n≤x

n as the sum of two squares and is positive integer, we have had to obtain non-trivial estimates for the error term in the asymptotic expansion of

1

The definition of injectivity, and the proof that every module has an injective extension which is a subextension of every other injective extension, are due to R. Baer [B]. An independent proof using the notion of essential extension was given by Eckmann-Schopf [ES]. Both proofs require the p reliminary construction of some injective overmodule. In [F] I showed how the latter proof could be freed from this requirement by exhibiting a set F in which every essential extension could be embedded. Subsequently J. M. Maranda pointed out that F has minimal cardinality. It follows that F is equipotent with the injective hull. Below Icon struct the injective hull by equipping Fit self with a module strucure.

The term 'covering' is known to any student who has seen the Heine-Borel theorem and he soon learns that it denotes a very basic and widely used concept. Quite generally, a family {Xα: α ∈ A} of a subsets of X is a covering of the subset Y of X if .

The concept of packing is perhaps no less frequently encountered although the term has only a rather specialized use. In general, a packing is any family of subsets {Xα: α ∈ A} of a set X which a re pairwise disjoint. To make this definition more similar to that of covering, we might define {Xα} to be a packing of the subset Y of X if Xα ∩ Xβ ∩ Y = ϕ for α ≠ β. This is intended to suggest only a P that there is a certain parallel between the ideas of packing and covering but not a duality in any technical sense.

In [2], a construction for the lower radical class R∘ (η) with respect to a class η of rings was given as the union of an inductively defined ascending transfinite chain of classes of rings. It was shown there that this construction terminates, for associative rings, at ω∘, the first infinite ordinal, in the sense that if {ηα: α an ordinal} is the chain, then R∘ (η) =ηω∘. Also, examples of classes η for which R∘ (η) = η1, η2, η3 were given.

In this note we consider the enumeration of unrestricted and restricted minimal lattice paths from (0, 0) to (m, n), with the following (μ + 2) moves, μ being a positive integer. Let the line segment between two lattice points on which no other lattice point lies be called a step. A lattice path at any stage can have either (1) a vertical step denoted by S0, or (2) a diagonal step parallel to the line x = ty (t = 1,…, μ), denoted by St, or (3) a horizontal step, denoted by Sμ+1.

Proofs of commutativity theorems for general rings usually employ the Jacobson structure theory; however, alternative approaches to the "xn = x theorem" [ l, 2] suggest that the power of the Jacobson theory is not required. In this note we prove two commutativity theorems of Herstein in an elementary way. Both proofs involve establishing first that the rings under consideration are duo-rings - rings in which every one-sided ideal is two-sided.

Let K be a field and Ka its algebraic closure. A valuation a ring A of K is called henselian, if there is only one valuation ring C of Ka which lies over A (i.e. such that C ∩ K = A) or, equivalently, if Hensel's Lemma is valid for K, A (see [5], F). In the following, we shall consider only rank one valuation rings.

A Room design of order 2n, where n is a positive integer, is an arrangement of 2n objects in a square array of side 2n - 1, such that each of the (2n - 1)2 cells of the array is either empty or contains exactly two distinct objects; each of the 2n objects appears exactly once in each row and column; and each (unordered) pair of objects occurs in exactly one cell. A Room design of order 2n is said to be cyclic if the entries in the (i + l) th row are obtained by moving the entries in the i th row one column to the right (with entries in the (2n - l)th column being moved to the first column), and increasing the entries in each occupied cell by l(mod 2n - 1), except that the digit 0 remains unchanged.

Let Mm(F) be the vector space of m - square matrices over a field F. If X belongs to Mm(F), then xij will denote the element occuring in row i and column j of X.

Let Sm be the symmetric group of degree m and ε: Sm → F the alternating character on Sm (i.e. ε(σ) = 1 or - 1 according as σ is an even or odd permutation).

Let N ≡ <N, +,.> be a (right) near-ring with 1 (we say N is a unitary near-ring)[1] and recall that a near-field is a unitary near-ring in which <N - {0}, . > is a multiplicative group. In [2], Beidelman characterizes near-fields as those unitary near-rings without non-trivial N-subgroups. We show that in the finite case this absence of non-trivial N-subgroups is equivalent to the absence of non-trivial left ideals.

In [3] H. Schwerdtfeger embedded the one-dimensional affine group over the real numbers in the projective plane. The relationship between group-theoretical properties and geometrical concepts was studied.

In this paper the methods of [3] are used to prove Pappus' theorem. In the final section we give a similar theorem for (4n+2)-gons.

This paper is a generalization of part of my master's thesis, written under the direction of Professor H. Schwerdtfeger.

If G and H are two groups such that their integral group rings Z(G) and Z(H) are isomorphic, does it follow that G and H are isomorphic? This is the isomorphism problem and an affirmative answer is obtained in case G is a sub group of the group of order preserving permutations of a totally ordered set.