We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The most eye-catching effect of digitalization on the law of enforcement jurisdiction is the fading into irrelevance of territoriality. Insofar as the “physical” location of digital data—on a server—may be entirely fortuitous and may in fact not be known by the territorial state, it appears unreasonable for that state to invoke its territorial sovereignty as a shield against another state’s claims over such data. To prevent a jurisdictional free-for-all, however, it is key that the exercise of extraterritorial enforcement jurisdiction in cyberspace becomes subject to a stringent test weighting all relevant connections and interests in concrete cases. Introducing such a weighting test means that extraterritorial enforcement jurisdiction is no longer governed by binary rules (allowed and not allowed), but becomes a matter of degree, requiring a granular, contextual assessment. It remains the case that such a flexible attitude towards extraterritorial enforcement jurisdiction is not universally shared, and that relevant state practice and expert opinion in favor of the “un-territoriality of data” has a particular Western slant.
Theorems of hyperarithmetic analysis (THAs) occupy an unusual neighborhood in the realms of reverse mathematics and recursion-theoretic complexity. They lie above all the fixed (recursive) iterations of the Turing jump but below ATR
$_{0}$
(and so
$\Pi _{1}^{1}$
-CA
$_{0}$
or the hyperjump). There is a long history of proof-theoretic principles which are THAs. Until the papers reported on in this communication, there was only one mathematical example. Barnes, Goh, and Shore [1] analyze an array of ubiquity theorems in graph theory descended from Halin’s [9] work on rays in graphs. They seem to be typical applications of ACA
$_{0}$
but are actually THAs. These results answer Question 30 of Montalbán’s Open Questions in Reverse Mathematics [19] and supply several other natural principles of different and unusual levels of complexity.
This work led in [25] to a new neighborhood of the reverse mathematical zoo: almost theorems of hyperarithmetic analysis (ATHAs). When combined with ACA
$_{0}$
they are THAs but on their own are very weak. Denizens both mathematical and logical are provided. Generalizations of several conservativity classes (
$\Pi _{1}^{1}$
, r-
$\Pi _{1}^{1}$
, and Tanaka) are defined and these ATHAs as well as many other principles are shown to be conservative over RCA
$_{0}$
in all these senses and weak in other recursion-theoretic ways as well. These results answer a question raised by Hirschfeldt and reported in [19] by providing a long list of pairs of principles one of which is very weak over RCA
$_{0}$
but over ACA
$_{0}$
is equivalent to the other which may be strong (THA) or very strong going up a standard hierarchy and at the end being stronger than full second-order arithmetic.
There is no consensus on the question of whether or not free-living protist species have biogeographies, with the strongest disagreement coming from advocates of the hypothesis that the extraordinary abundance of protists drives their ubiquitous dispersal. If the probability of a species being ubiquitous is a function of its absolute global abundance, then the species that are least likely to be ubiquitous are those with relatively small global populations, i.e. the largest species. Among the free-living ciliated protozoa, a prime candidate for such an organism must be the large (~1200 μm long), unmistakable, fragile, non-encysting karyorelictid Loxodes rex. This ciliate was known only from fresh waters in tropical Africa and it was long considered to be a rare example of an endemic ciliate. Here it is reported that Loxodes rex is thriving in a pond in Thailand. The status of other alleged endemic ciliate species is discussed.
Given a finite lexicon L of relational symbols and equality, one may view the collection of all L-structures on the set of natural numbers ω as a space in several different ways. We consider it as: (i) the space of outcomes of certain infinite two-person games; (ii) a compact metric space; and (iii) a probability measure space. For each of these viewpoints, we can give a notion of relative ubiquity, or largeness, for invariant sets of structures on ω. For example, in every sense of relative ubiquity considered here, the set of dense linear orderings on ω is ubiquitous in the set of linear orderings on ω.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.