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.
Finite bit flips cannot defeat a free ultrafilter
Statement
Let be a free ultrafilter on . If is finite, then
Consequently a finite-bit flip cannot produce Feferman's ultrafilter contradiction; the infinite tail-complement flip is essential.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A free ultrafilter on and subsets with finite symmetric difference.
Ultrafilter defines freeness as failure to be principal at every point and includes the proper-filter intersection and upward-closure laws.
Characterisation of ultrafilters: every set or its complement says an ultrafilter contains exactly one member of every complementary pair.
The difference , the symmetric difference , and the complement relative to a set defines as the set of points at which membership differs.
Proof
No finite set belongs to . Otherwise, since is not principal, no singleton belongs to ; F2 then puts every in . Intersecting these complements for the finitely many puts in , so propriety is contradicted by . This includes , which is excluded directly by propriety. By F2, every cofinite set therefore belongs to .
Put . By F3 this is exactly the set on which and agree, and it is cofinite by the Given hypothesis; hence by step 1.1. If , then , while agreement gives , so upward closure gives . Exchanging and proves the reverse implication. Thus the displayed equivalence holds, including , , and .
A flip of only finitely many bits replaces by some with finite , so step 2.1 preserves its membership status in and supplies no contradiction. Feferman's automorphism instead sends the selected real to a finite modification of : invariance then transfers its membership to the complement, which conflicts with F2. The distinction is between a finite flip and an infinite tail flip, not between two descriptions of the same automorphism.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
11 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.