If you are considering Danny as an advisor for your PhD, here are some typical questions and answers. These things are negotiable, and you should not consider them hard-and-fast rules.
Broadly speaking, you should be interested in geometry. This is a word which means different things to different people, so it is worth clarifying what is meant by this. Here are some areas of geometry which I find particularly interesting:
As a general rule, I'm not especially interested in Algebraic Topology. However, I am quite interested in the algebraic topology of groups of homeomorphisms of certain quality of simple manifolds, like n-dimensional space and the circle.
Here are some excellent books/papers relevant to the material above.
It's up to you, but what I find helpful is to always have some hard problem in mind - usually some well-known conjecture - and when I learn new material, try to relate it to my problem. Another approach, apparently practiced by Shelah, is to always have three problems that you're working on - an easy one, usually an exercise to master a recently learned concept, a moderately difficult one, maybe a generalization of some recent result of someone else, and a very hard one, perhaps a well-known conjecture as above. When you're stuck on one problem, move to the next.
Also very important is to build up a library of examples of geometric phenomena which you understand very well, from many points of view. Whenever you learn a new abstract concept, try to see how your examples fit into this idea, and try to generate new examples which illustrate the main point.
Initially, quite structured. I will expect you to meet with me every week at a regular time. I will expect you to read, or to attempt to read, papers that I suggest. I will want you to have prepared material to discuss in detail at these meetings. As you progress, however, I expect the relationship to become less structured, as you start to generate your own ideas and develop as an independent researcher.
Hmm, maybe.
This is a good question. My own research tends to suggest many problems, and I only have the time to follow up a small fraction of them. I am more likely to be an attentive and useful advisor to someone working on a problem close to my current strengths and interests.