Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

A free irrational torus action that is not proper

Statement refuted

False claim: every smooth free action of a Lie group on a manifold is proper and has a Hausdorff orbit quotient.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An irrational number α and T2=S1×S1 with its usual smooth structure.

[F1]

A left action is free when all stabilizers are trivial, and it is proper when (t,x)(tx,x) has compact inverse images of compact sets. Free and proper Lie-group actions.

[F2]

For irrational α, the displayed action is smooth and free and all its orbits are dense. The irrational torus flow is free with dense orbits.

[F3]

The wrap-metric circle T=[0,1) is compact, and finite products of compact spaces are compact. The unit-interval circle is a nonempty compact metric space, A product of finitely many compact spaces is compact in the product topology.

Counterexample

technique · constructive
1.1

Define the R-action on T2 by t(z,w)=(e2πitz,e2πiαtw). By [F2], it is a smooth free left action.

givenF1F2construct
2.1

Every orbit is dense by [F2].

F2step 1.1
2.2

The action is not proper. The map ue2πiu identifies the wrap-metric circle in [F3] with the complex unit circle S1: their chordal distance is e2πiue2πiv=2sin(πd(u,v)), so the map is a homeomorphism. Thus [F3] makes S1, then T2×T2, compact. The full inverse image of this compact target under the action-graph map is R×T2. Were it compact, its continuous projection onto R would make R compact by [F4], contrary to the open cover {(n,n):n1}, which has no finite subcover.

F1F3F4step 1.1
3.1

The quotient is not Hausdorff. Each orbit is a proper dense subset: it is dense by step 2.1. For a point (z,w), choose θR with z=e2πiθ. Its orbit meets {1}×S1 only at the countable set {(1,e2πiα(nθ)w):nZ}, so it cannot contain the whole circle {1}×S1 and is therefore proper. If the quotient were Hausdorff, a singleton orbit class would be closed and its inverse image under the quotient map would be a closed orbit, contradicting density and properness. This free, nonproper action therefore refutes both conclusions, without using any choice principle.

F1step 2.1step 2.2discharge-construct: counterexample complete

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

37 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources