Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge 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 sum of two divergent sequences can converge: k+(−k)

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: if the sum (xk+yk) of two sequences of reals converges, then (xk) and (yk) both converge.

The witnesses are xk:=k and yk:=−k, where k denotes the canonical natural of R (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing): (xk) diverges to +∞ and (yk) to −∞, while the sum is the constant sequence 0, which converges to 0 (Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences, Limits and Cauchy sequences of reals). This is the caution noted immediately after the algebra of limits: the clauses of Algebra of limits: sums, scalar multiples, products and quotients may not be read backwards.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The sequences xk:=k and yk:=−k, where the natural k denotes its canonical image k⋅1R in R (Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).

[F1]

Divergence to signed infinity: zk→+∞ when for every real M there is K with zk>M for all k≥K; and zk→−∞ when for every real M there is K with zk<M for all k≥K (Divergence to +∞ and to −∞).

[F2]

Archimedean property: for every real x there is a natural number n≥1 with x<n⋅1R (Every complete ordered field is Archimedean).

[F3]

Canonical naturals: for every n≥1 the element n⋅1R is positive, and n↦n⋅1R is strictly increasing on {1,2,3,… }, hence preserves non-strict order there (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).

[F4]

Order arithmetic in an ordered field: a<b means b−a is positive, so a<b if and only if −b<−a; and trichotomy holds for the strict order (Ordered field, Order on the reals).

[F5]

Field arithmetic: every element u has an additive inverse −u with u+(−u)=0, and u−u=0 (Field).

[F6]

Absolute value: ∣u∣=u whenever u≥0, so ∣0∣=0 (Absolute value in an ordered field).

[F7]

Convergence: a sequence (zk) converges to z when for every rational ε>0 there is K with ∣zk−z∣<ε for all k≥K (Limits and Cauchy sequences of reals).

[F8]

Every convergent sequence is bounded: if (zk) converges to z then there is M with ∣zk∣≤M for every k (Every convergent sequence is bounded).

[F9]

Boundedness: (zk) is bounded when there is a real M with ∣zk∣≤M for every k∈N (Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences).

[F10]

A sequence diverging to +∞ or to −∞ is unbounded, and an unbounded sequence is not convergent — the latter being the contrapositive of [F8] (Divergence to +∞ and to −∞, Every convergent sequence is bounded, Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences).

[F11]

Sum rule of the algebra of limits: if (uk) converges to u and (vk) converges to v, then uk+vk converges to u+v (Algebra of limits: sums, scalar multiples, products and quotients).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1givenF1F2F3

(xk)=(k) diverges to +∞: given a real M, [F2] supplies a natural N≥1 with M<N, and for every k≥N the order preservation of [F3] gives N≤k, so xk>M; this is the condition of [F1] with K=N.

1.2givenF1F2F3F4

(yk)=(−k) diverges to −∞: given a real M, apply [F2] to −M to get a natural N≥1 with −M<N; for every k≥N order preservation [F3] gives N≤k, and [F4] turns −M<k into −k<M, so yk<M for all k≥N.

1.3givenF5

For every k the sum is xk+yk=k+(−k)=0, so the sum sequence is constantly 0.

2.1step 1.3F6F7

The constant sequence 0 converges to 0: for a rational ε>0 and every k, ∣0−0∣=∣0∣=0<ε by [F6], so the threshold K=0 witnesses the condition of [F7].

3.1step 1.1step 1.2step 2.1F8F9F10F11∎

Neither summand converges: by steps 1.1 and 1.2 the sequences diverge to signed infinity, so by [F10] they are unbounded in the sense of [F9] and do not converge. Meanwhile the sum converges to 0 by step 2.1, although the convergence hypothesis of the sum rule [F11] fails for both summands; hence the sum rule cannot be read backwards and the refuted claim fails.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

33 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