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 nonzero period obstructs exactness and bounding
Statement
Assume for the compact-support manifold integrals and general Stokes theorem. Let be an oriented compact boundaryless embedded -submanifold, , and let be a closed smooth -form on . If , then is not exact on , and cannot be the induced oriented boundary of a compact embedded -submanifold of .
Facts & Assumptions
is countable choice; it is used through the general Stokes consequence [F2].
A compactly supported primitive has zero total derivative integral: If is oriented and boundaryless, , and , then . In particular, on a compact such manifold every exact smooth top form has zero integral. The compact-support assumption is on the primitive , not merely on .
Closed forms have zero boundary integral: For oriented with boundary, , if is closed, then . When is compact, no separate support assumption on the smooth closed form is needed.
Integration on an oriented embedded submanifold: Let be an oriented embedded smooth -submanifold, with boundary allowed. For a smooth -form on such that has compact support on , define . If is an orientation-preserving diffeomorphism, this equals . Compact support is required on itself.
Form calculus extends locally across a manifold boundary: On smooth manifolds with boundary, the coordinate exterior derivative, pullback naturality, graded Leibniz rule, support containment, and Cartan identity hold for smooth forms: For arbitrary smooth vector fields at boundary points, is defined by local Euclidean extensions; a two-sided flow inside the manifold is not required.
Proof
Given: and the objects and hypotheses in the statement above.
If on , pullback to gives . The primitive is compactly supported because is compact. Exact-integral vanishing on boundaryless gives , contrary to the specified nonzero value.
If with the induced orientation for a compact oriented embedded , the restriction of to is closed by pullback naturality. Under [A1], the closed-boundary integral result gives , again inconsistent with the hypothesis. Empty or zero has zero integral and cannot meet that hypothesis; uses precisely the same two applications.
Depends on
Used by
- An irrational flow on a symplectic torus is symplectic but not Hamiltonian Counterexample
- The closed angular form on the punctured plane is not exact Counterexample
- The angular form generates the first de rham cohomology of the circle Example
- The angular period and the obstruction to bounding Example
- Every symplectic action is Hamiltonian False statement
- The poincare lemma says every closed form is globally exact False statement
Dependency tree · two levels
22 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
- Lee Corollary 16.15, pp.414–415 (standard reference, not scraped)