§1. Introduction. Asymptotic cones of metric spaces were first invented by Gromov. They are metric spaces which capture the ‘large-scale structure’ of the underlying metric space. Later, van den Dries and Wilkie gave a more general construction of asymptotic cones using ultrapowers. Certain facts about asymptotic cones, like the completeness of the metric space, now follow rather easily from saturation properties of ultrapowers, and in this survey, we want to present two applications of the van den Dries-Wilkie approach. Using ultrapowers (...) we obtain an explicit description of the asymptotic cone of a semisimple Lie group. From this description, using semi-algebraic groups and non-standard methods, we can give a short proof of the Margulis Conjecture. In a second application, we use set theory to answer a question of Gromov.§2. Definitions. The intuitive idea behind Gromov's concept of an asymptotic cone was to look at a given metric space from an ‘infinite distance’, so that large-scale patterns should become visible. In his original definition this was done by gradually scaling down the metric by factors 1/nfornϵ ℕ. In the approach by van den Dries and Wilkie, this idea was captured by ultrapowers. Their construction is more general in the sense that the asymptotic cone exists for any metric space, whereas in Gromov's original definition, the asymptotic cone existed only for a rather restricted class of spaces. (shrink)

§1. Introduction. Asymptotic cones of metric spaces were first invented by Gromov. They are metric spaces which capture the ‘large-scale structure’ of the underlying metric space. Later, van den Dries and Wilkie gave a more general construction of asymptotic cones using ultrapowers. Certain facts about asymptotic cones, like the completeness of the metric space, now follow rather easily from saturation properties of ultrapowers, and in this survey, we want to present two applications of the van den Dries-Wilkie approach. Using ultrapowers (...) we obtain an explicit description of the asymptotic cone of a semisimple Lie group. From this description, using semi-algebraic groups and non-standard methods, we can give a short proof of the Margulis Conjecture. In a second application, we use set theory to answer a question of Gromov.§2. Definitions. The intuitive idea behind Gromov's concept of an asymptotic cone was to look at a given metric space from an ‘infinite distance’, so that large-scale patterns should become visible. In his original definition this was done by gradually scaling down the metric by factors 1/nfornϵ ℕ. In the approach by van den Dries and Wilkie, this idea was captured by ultrapowers. Their construction is more general in the sense that the asymptotic cone exists for any metric space, whereas in Gromov's original definition, the asymptotic cone existed only for a rather restricted class of spaces. (shrink)

Let S∞ denote the topological group of permutations of the natural numbers. A closed subgroup G of S∞ is called oligomorphic if for each n, its natural action on n-tuples of natural numbers has onl...

Using projectivity groups, we classify some polygons with strongly minimal point rows and show in particular that no infinite quadrangle can have sharply 2-transitive projectivity groups in which the point stabilizers are abelian. In fact, we characterize the finite orthogonal quadrangles Q, Q$^-$ and Q by this property. Finally we show that the sets of points, lines and flags of any N$_1$-categorical polygon have Morley degree 1.

Assume T is unidimensional, 1-based and every minimal type in T is locally finite. If H is an Λ -definable irreducible group, we find an irreducible supergroup G of H in acleq such that any connected subgroup of Gn, n < ω, is the connected component of a subgroup linearly defined over the ring End*. In some cases we can take G = H.

Let G be a simple group of finite Morley rank with a definable BN-pair of rank 2 where B=UT for T=B ∩ N and U a normal subgroup of B with Z≠1. By [9] 853) the Weyl group W=N/T has cardinality 2n with n=3,4,6,8 or 12. We prove here:Theorem 1. If n=3, then G is interpretably isomorphic to PSL3 for some algebraically closed field K.Theorem 2. Suppose Z contains some B-minimal subgroup AZ with RMRM for both parabolic subgroups P1 and (...) P2. Then n=3,4 or 6 and G is interpretably isomorphic to PSL3, PSp4 or G2 for some algebraically closed field K.Theorem 3. If U is nilpotent and n≠8, then G is interpretably isomorphic to either PSL3, PSp4 or G2 for some algebraically closed field K. (shrink)