Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-26
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.

Z\mathbb{Z} and {n+1/n:n2}\{n + 1/n : n \ge 2\} are disjoint closed subsets of R\mathbb{R} at distance 00, so the set-to-set distance is not a metric

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: the set-to-set distance d(A,B)=inf{d(a,b):aA, bB}d(A,B) = \inf\{d(a,b) : a \in A,\ b \in B\} of Bounded subset, diameter, distance from a point to a set, and distance between two sets in a metric space is a metric on the nonempty subsets of a metric space; specifically, that it satisfies the separation axiom (M1) of Metric space: d(x,y)=0d(x,y) = 0 iff x=yx = y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric, so that d(A,B)=0d(A,B) = 0 forces A=BA = B.

Work in R\mathbb{R} with its usual metric (The absolute value makes R\mathbb{R} a metric space: d(x,y)=xyd(x,y) = |x-y| is a metric, its open balls are the intervals (xr,x+r)(x-r, x+r), and it is unbounded) and write mm for the canonical copy of an integer mm inside R\mathbb{R} (The integers as equivalence classes of pairs of naturals, The integers embed in the rationals, The unique embedding of ℚ into an ordered field). Put

A:={m:mZ},B:={n+1n  :  nN, n2}.A := \{\, m : m \in \mathbb{Z} \,\}, \qquad B := \Big\{\, n + \tfrac{1}{n} \;:\; n \in \mathbb{N},\ n \ge 2 \,\Big\}.

Then AA and BB are nonempty, disjoint, closed in R\mathbb{R}, and

d(A,B)=0whileAB.d(A,B) = 0 \qquad \text{while} \qquad A \ne B .

So (M1) fails for the set-to-set distance, and it fails on a pair of closed sets: closedness is not the missing hypothesis. Moreover d(b,A)>0d(b, A) > 0 for every individual bBb \in B, so the infimum over pairs is not attained anywhere.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The real line with dR(u,v)=uvd_{\mathbb{R}}(u,v) = |u-v|; the sets AA and BB above; and, for a subset ERE \subseteq \mathbb{R}, the property of being cc-separated for a real c>0c > 0, meaning eec|e - e'| \ge c whenever e,eEe, e' \in E with eee \ne e'.

[L1]

The embeddings ZQR\mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{Q} \to \mathbb{R} are injective and order preserving (The integers embed in the rationals, The unique embedding of ℚ into an ordered field, The integers as equivalence classes of pairs of naturals), and Z\mathbb{Z} is totally ordered (The integers form a totally ordered ring); every integer 0\ge 0 is the image of a unique natural under NZ\mathbb{N} \to \mathbb{Z}, which is injective and order preserving (The naturals embed in the integers); and a natural n0n \ne 0 satisfies n1n \ge 1 (Discreteness: σ(n)\sigma(n) is the immediate successor, The natural numbers N\mathbb{N} (von Neumann)).

[L2]

Canonical naturals in R\mathbb{R}: n1R>0n \cdot 1_{\mathbb{R}} > 0 for n1n \ge 1 and nn1Rn \mapsto n \cdot 1_{\mathbb{R}} is strictly increasing (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing); reciprocals of positives are positive and reverse the order (Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order); and r>1r > 1 gives 0<1/r<10 < 1/r < 1 (Reciprocals and order: 1/r1/r against 11).

[L3]

Reciprocal Archimedean property: for every real ε>0\varepsilon > 0 there is a natural n1n \ge 1 with 1/n<ε1/n < \varepsilon (For every ε>0\varepsilon > 0 in a complete ordered field there is a natural n1n \ge 1 with 1/n<ε1/n < \varepsilon, Every complete ordered field is Archimedean).

[L4]

Absolute value: t0|t| \ge 0, t=t|t| = t for t0t \ge 0, t=t|-t| = |t|, and t<c|t| < c is equivalent to c<t<c-c < t < c (Basic properties of the absolute value, Absolute value in an ordered field).

[L5]

Infima: d(x,E)d(x,E) and d(E,F)d(E,F) exist for nonempty sets, being infima of nonempty sets bounded below by 00 (Bounded subset, diameter, distance from a point to a set, and distance between two sets in a metric space, Nonnegativity of a metric is a consequence of the other axioms, not an axiom, Every nonempty set bounded below has an infimum, Greatest lower bound (infimum)); and =infS\ell = \inf S for a lower bound \ell of a nonempty SS bounded below exactly when for every real ε>0\varepsilon > 0 some sSs \in S has s<+εs < \ell + \varepsilon (Epsilon characterisation of the infimum).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

No canonical integer lies strictly between 00 and 11: if 0<k<10 < k < 1 in R\mathbb{R} for an integer kk, then 0<k<10 < k < 1 already in Z\mathbb{Z}, because the embedding is order preserving and injective and the order of Z\mathbb{Z} is total; then k>0k > 0 makes kk the image of a natural n0n \ne 0, so n1n \ge 1 and hence k1k \ge 1, contradicting k<1k < 1.

L1L7
1.2

BB is 12\tfrac{1}{2}-separated: for naturals p>q2p > q \ge 2 one has pq1p - q \ge 1 and 0<1/p<1/q1/20 < 1/p < 1/q \le 1/2, so (p+1/p)(q+1/q)=(pq)(1/q1/p)11/q11/2=1/2(p + 1/p) - (q + 1/q) = (p - q) - (1/q - 1/p) \ge 1 - 1/q \ge 1 - 1/2 = 1/2; hence distinct elements of BB differ by at least 1/21/2 in absolute value.

L2L4L7
1.3

A cc-separated set ERE \subseteq \mathbb{R} is closed: let xEx \notin E. The ball B(x,c/2)B(x, c/2) contains at most one point of EE, since two distinct points of it would be within c/2+c/2=cc/2 + c/2 = c of each other, contradicting cc-separation with a strict inequality. If it contains none, then B(x,c/2)E=B(x,c/2) \cap E = \emptyset. If it contains exactly one point ee, then xex \ne e gives t:=xe>0t := |x - e| > 0, and the radius r:=min{c/2, t}>0r := \min\{c/2,\ t\} > 0 has B(x,r)E=B(x,r) \cap E = \emptyset, because any point of EE in B(x,r)B(x,c/2)B(x,r) \subseteq B(x,c/2) would have to be ee, while xe=tr|x - e| = t \ge r puts ee outside B(x,r)B(x,r). So the complement of EE is open and EE is closed.

L4L6L7
2.1

AA is 11-separated: for integers mmm \ne m' the difference k:=mmk := m - m' is a nonzero integer, so by step 1.1 and trichotomy either k1k \ge 1 or k1-k \ge 1, and in both cases mm=k1|m - m'| = |k| \ge 1.

step 1.1L1L4L7
2.2

AA and BB are disjoint and both nonempty: 0A0 \in A and 2+1/2B2 + 1/2 \in B; and if n+1/n=mn + 1/n = m for a natural n2n \ge 2 and an integer mm, then the integer mnm - n satisfies mn=1/nm - n = 1/n with 0<1/n<10 < 1/n < 1 by [L2], contradicting step 1.1.

step 1.1L1L2L7
3.1

AA and BB are closed subsets of R\mathbb{R}, by steps 2.1, 1.2 and 1.3 with c=1c = 1 and c=1/2c = 1/2 respectively.

step 1.2step 1.3step 2.1
3.2

d(A,B)=0d(A,B) = 0: the set {ab:aA,bB}\{|a - b| : a \in A, b \in B\} is nonempty and bounded below by 00, and for each natural n2n \ge 2 it contains n(n+1/n)=1/n|n - (n + 1/n)| = 1/n; given a real ε>0\varepsilon > 0, [L3] supplies a natural n1n \ge 1 with 1/n<ε1/n < \varepsilon, and then n+12n + 1 \ge 2 with 1/(n+1)<1/n<ε=0+ε1/(n+1) < 1/n < \varepsilon = 0 + \varepsilon, so the infimum is 00 by the epsilon characterisation.

step 2.2L2L3L4L5
4.1

Yet every single point of BB is at positive distance from AA: for bBb \in B we have bA=Ab \notin A = \overline{A} by steps 2.2 and 3.1, so d(b,A)0d(b,A) \ne 0 by the description of the closure, and d(b,A)0d(b,A) \ge 0, hence d(b,A)>0d(b,A) > 0.

step 2.2step 3.1L5L6L7
5.1

So AA and BB are nonempty disjoint closed subsets of R\mathbb{R} with d(A,B)=0d(A,B) = 0 and ABA \ne B: the separation axiom (M1) fails for the set-to-set distance, and it fails even on closed sets and even though each individual point-to-set distance is strictly positive.

step 2.2step 3.2step 4.1

Remarks

  • What survives. The set-to-set distance is symmetric and vanishes on A=AA = A, and on singletons it reduces to the metric. It satisfies no useful triangle inequality either: in R\mathbb{R} the sets A={0}A = \{0\}, B={0,10}B = \{0, 10\}, C={10}C = \{10\} have d(A,B)=d(B,C)=0d(A,B) = d(B,C) = 0 while d(A,C)=10d(A,C) = 10, so d(A,C)d(A,B)+d(B,C)d(A,C) \le d(A,B) + d(B,C) fails. The construction that does give a metric on a family of sets is the Hausdorff distance, which is taken up on a later page and not defined here.
  • Where the intuition breaks. For a nonempty AA, the function xd(x,A)x \mapsto d(x,A) vanishes exactly on A\overline{A} (The closure of a nonempty AA is {x:d(x,A)=0}\{x : d(x,A) = 0\}, equals AA together with its limit points, and is the smallest closed superset), so a point at distance 00 from a closed set does lie in it. The set-to-set distance takes an infimum over a second variable as well, and an infimum of a family of positive numbers can be 00; step 4.1 is exactly the record of that.
  • The two sets approach each other only along their tails. The point n+1/nn + 1/n of BB sits at distance exactly 1/n1/n from the integer nn; those distances are all positive, and by step 3.2 their infimum is 00. That is the whole mechanism: the distance is driven to 00 by pairs with nn arbitrarily large, never by any single pair.

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: 106 results over 33 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