Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

The critical Sobolev embedding is not compact

Statement refuted

Refuted claim. The continuous critical embedding W01,p(Ω)↪Lp∗(Ω), p∗=npn−p, is compact.

The witness is the standard concentrating cone: one fixed profile rescaled so that its Lp∗ norm is constant while its support shrinks to a point.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the Axiom of Choice, n≥2, Ω=B(0,1)⊂Rn, 1≤p<n, p∗=npn−p, and uk(x):=k(n−p)/pmax⁡{0,1−k∣x∣} for k≥1.

[F2]

Membership in W01,p(Ω). Each uk is Lipschitz on Ω‾ and vanishes on ∂Ω. Its Sobolev trace is therefore zero, because the trace agrees with boundary values for continuous Sobolev functions; the trace-kernel theorem then gives uk∈W01,p(Ω). To establish the missing premise for that chain rule, on the ball put rε(x)=∣x∣2+ε2. These smooth functions converge uniformly to ∣x∣, and ∂irε=xi/rε converges almost everywhere to xi/∣x∣, with modulus at most 1. Dominated convergence passes their weak test identities to the limit, proving ∣x∣∈W1,p(Ω) with that weak gradient for finite p. The scalar truncation chain rule then gives the cone gradient and membership. (Dominated convergence, Classical derivatives agree with weak derivatives) (Chain rule for globally Lipschitz scalar maps of Sobolev functions, Positive, negative, and truncated Sobolev functions, The trace agrees with classical restriction for continuous Sobolev functions, The kernel of the trace is the closure of the test functions, Zero-boundary Sobolev space as a norm closure, Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms)

[F3]

Almost-everywhere subsequences. An Lp∗-convergent sequence has a subsequence converging almost everywhere to a representative of its limit (1<p∗<∞). (Assuming Countable Choice, Lp-convergent sequences have almost-everywhere convergent subsequences, The space Lp(μ) as the quotient by null functions)

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1F1F2given

By [F1], ∥uk∥Lp∗p∗=k(n−p)p∗/pk−n∥u1∥Lp∗p∗=∥u1∥Lp∗p∗>0 because (n−p)p∗/p=n, and ∥Duk∥Lp=k(n−p)/p+1k−n/p∥Du1∥Lp=∥Du1∥Lp, while ∥uk∥Lp=k(n−p)/pk−n/p∥u1∥Lp=k−1∥u1∥Lp→0; by [F2] all uk lie in W01,p(Ω), so the sequence is bounded in W01,p(Ω) and converges to 0 almost everywhere and in Lp(Ω).

2.1F2F3step 1.1∎

Suppose a subsequence converged in Lp∗(Ω) to some w. Then ∥w∥Lp∗=∥u1∥Lp∗>0 by continuity of the norm, while [F3] provides a further subsequence converging almost everywhere to a representative of w; since uk(x)→0 for every x≠0, that representative vanishes almost everywhere, forcing w=0 and contradicting the positive norm. Hence no subsequence converges in Lp∗(Ω) and the refuted compactness claim is false; the companion subcritical statement Subcritical compactness for W01,p on arbitrary bounded open sets shows that the strict inequality q<p∗ cannot be relaxed. The Axiom of Choice is inherited through [F2].

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

126 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