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 field homomorphism of ordered fields need not preserve order
Statement refuted
Refuted claim: every field homomorphism between ordered fields is order-preserving, that is, in implies in .
The witness is the conjugation map on , which is a field homomorphism from an ordered field to itself yet sends the positive element to the negative element .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The reals , a complete ordered field, with the positive square root of .
In the element has a positive square root with and (Square roots exist: a unique with ; the positives are ).
No rational number squares to , so is irrational (FALSE: some rational number squares to 2).
A field homomorphism satisfies , , and (Field homomorphism and embedding).
In an ordered field, means lies in the positive cone, and means ; exactly one of , , holds (Ordered field).
A field homomorphism from a complete ordered field into an ordered field is order-preserving (Homomorphisms out of a complete ordered field are order-preserving).
Counterexample
Working inside , let ; then and both lie in , so is closed under addition and multiplication.
Each nonzero is invertible in , with , where since otherwise forces and the rational , contradicting [L2].
The representation of an element of as with is unique, for with would give .
In the element satisfies .
By steps 1.1 and 1.2, is a subfield of , hence an ordered field under the positive cone inherited from .
By the uniqueness in step 1.3, the map given by is well defined.
The real number is not in , for would square to , whence step 1.3 forces and , impossible for real .
is additive: .
is multiplicative: .
fixes the identity: .
, and in by step 1.4.
By steps 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3, satisfies the three homomorphism identities, so is a field homomorphism between ordered fields.
Steps 2.1 and 4.1 exhibit a field homomorphism between ordered fields with in the domain yet by step 3.4, so is not order-preserving, refuting the claim that every field homomorphism between ordered fields is order-preserving.
There is no conflict with [L5]: if were complete, [L5] would make order-preserving, contrary to step 5.1. Hence is not complete.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 22 results over 8 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- W. Rudin, Principles of Mathematical Analysis, 3rd ed., Ch. 1 (standard reference, not scraped)
- T. Tao, Analysis I, 3rd ed. (standard reference, not scraped)
- University of Wisconsin Math 521 notes: Real analysis (standard reference, not scraped)