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.
Rational powers of a positive base
Definition
Let with and let (The rationals as equivalence classes of pairs of integers).
Every rational has a representative with positive denominator (Every rational has a positive-denominator representative), so write with and a positive integer; a positive integer is the image of a unique natural (The naturals embed in the integers), and we write for that natural too. Define
where is the unique nonnegative -th root of (Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with ) and the outer exponent is an integer power (Integer powers ). The outer power is legitimate because when , so it has an inverse and negative integer exponents are allowed.
Well-definedness. The right-hand side must not depend on which representative
of was chosen. It does not: that is Rational powers do not depend on the representative ↗,
which is recorded in this item's justified_by rather than in its deps, since
it is a statement about the operation defined here and therefore depends on
this definition.
The base must be positive. For the same formula is not a definition at all, because different representatives of the same rational give different answers, or no answer: see FALSE: extends to negative bases, which is exactly the item that justifies the restriction.
Supplementary clause for the base . For and rational (Order on the rationals) the displayed formula still makes sense and still does not depend on the representative: forces , and (Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with applies to every ). So we set for rational . For the expression is left undefined, since has no inverse. This clause is what lets the inequalities later on this page be stated for nonnegative entries rather than for positive ones only.
Remarks
- Consistency with integer powers. If then , (Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with ), and the definition returns as given by Integer powers . So the notation is unambiguous, and rational powers extend integer powers on positive bases. At it returns , so the root notation of Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with is the special case , as intended.
- for every and every , the exponent included. Writing with : the root is positive (Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with ); for the value is a natural power of a positive element, hence positive, which is claim 1 of Monotonicity of and of and covers as well, since ; and for the value is (Laws of integer exponents, claim 2), the inverse of a positive element, hence positive (Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order). Note that Monotonicity of and of is stated for natural exponents only, so it does not by itself settle the negative case; that is what the inverse step is for. The exponent laws are Laws of rational exponents and the order behaviour is Monotonicity of and of .
- The exponent is a rational, never a real. Nothing on this page is a limit, a series or a continuous function, and is computed in finitely many field operations once the root is available. What would be needed to go further, why it is deferred here, and where the library later defines for real are recorded in Why real exponents are deferred on the rational-powers page.
- The convention of Integer powers is untouched: is not covered by the supplementary clause, which asks for . So while for every rational . There is no inconsistency, only the familiar fact that the two-variable function has no continuous extension to , a statement this library cannot even make yet.
Depends on
- Existence and uniqueness of $n$-th roots: a unique $a^{1/n} \ge 0$ with $(a^{1/n})^n = a$
- Integer powers $a^m$
- The rationals as equivalence classes of pairs of integers
- Every rational has a positive-denominator representative
- The naturals embed in the integers
- Order on the rationals
- Monotonicity of $x \mapsto x^n$ and of $n \mapsto a^n$
- Laws of integer exponents
- Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order
Used by
- Raabe is Kummer with ζₖ = k+1: for positive terms, liminf (k+1)(aₖ/aₖ₊₁ - 1) > 1 gives convergence and limsup < 1 gives divergence Corollary
- ∏_j ≥ 0 (1 + (-1)ʲ/√j+2) has partial products tending to 0 although ∑_j ≥ 0 (-1)ʲ/√j+2 converges Counterexample
- ∑ k^-1/2 diverges and ∑ k⁻² converges, and both have root limit exactly 1 Counterexample
- aₖ = 2^-k+(-1)ᵏ has ratio limsup 2 and liminf 1/8, so the ratio test fails, while the root test gives convergence Counterexample
- With aⱼ = (-1)ʲ/√j+1 convergent and bⱼ = (-1)ʲ bounded but not monotone, ∑ aⱼ bⱼ = ∑ 1/√j+1 diverges Counterexample
- With aₖ/bₖ → 0, convergence of ∑ aₖ does not give convergence of ∑ bₖ Counterexample
- x ↦ √x on (0,1] is differentiable with unbounded derivative and is not Lipschitz there, so the boundedness hypothesis in the Lipschitz corollary cannot be dropped Counterexample
- Lipschitz map, α-Hölder map for rational 0 < α ≤ 1, and contraction Definition
- Real powers from suprema of rational powers, with the reciprocal convention below base one Definition
- The p-norms ‖ x‖ₚ for rational p ≥ 1, and ‖ x‖_∞ Definition
- ∏_j ≥ 0 (1 - 1/(j+2)) has partial products 1/(n+1), which tend to 0, so the product does not converge in the sense used here Example
- ∑ 1/k² converges with sum at most 2, by comparison with the telescoping ∑ 1/(k(k-1)) Example
- ∑_j ≥ 0 (-1)ʲ/(j+1) converges conditionally, with sum strictly between 1/2 and 1 Example
- √· on [0,∞) is uniformly continuous and exactly 1/2-Hölder, and is not Lipschitz Example
- ∫₀¹ x^-1/2 dx=2 Example
- A convergent series in ℝ² with Γ a line and Γ^⊥ a line, computed from the definition Example
- A positive sequence making all three inequalities of the ratio-to-root chain strict Example
- aₖ = 2^-k + (-1)ᵏ has liminf aₖ₊₁/aₖ = 1/8, limsup aₖ₊₁/aₖ = 2 and lim aₖ^1/k = 1/2 Example
- Condensation reduces ∑ 1/kᵖ to a geometric series with ratio 2¹⁻ᵖ Example
- Convergence range of x⁻ᵖ(1+x)^-q on (0,∞) for rational exponents Example
- For a natural n ≥ 1, the derivative of x ↦ x^1/n on (0,∞) is 1/ι(n)x^1/n - 1, obtained from the inverse rule applied to x ↦ xⁿ; in particular (√x)' = 1/(ι(2)√x) Example
- H(x) = 2√x on [0,1]: H is continuous, H' is unbounded on (0,1], and H' is therefore not Riemann integrable Example
- On [0,1] the function x^β is β-Hölder and is α-Hölder for no rational α > β, so the Hölder classes are strictly nested Example
- The four standard limits n^1/n → 1, a^1/n → 1, n^α/(1+p)ⁿ → 0 and xᵏ/k! → 0, computed Example
- The integral test applied to ∑ 1/ι(k+1)ᵖ for rational p>0, cross-checked against the published p-series theorem Example
- The mean value theorem gives |√x - √y| ≤ 1/ι(2) |x - y| for x, y ≥ 1, so the square root is Lipschitz with constant 1/2 on [1,∞) Example
- The n-th root as a continuous inverse: for a natural n ≥ 1 the map x ↦ xⁿ is continuous and strictly increasing on [0,∞) with image [0,∞), so its inverse x ↦ x^1/n is continuous and strictly increasing Example
- The period-three pattern 1, 1, -2 has partial sums in {0,1,2}, so ∑ aₖ/(k+1) converges by Dirichlet's test although the alternating series test does not apply Example
- The substitution x=1/t exchanges the two rational p-tests Example
- Young's theorem integrates a Hölder function of unbounded variation against itself Example
- FALSE: ∏ (1 + pₖ) converges whenever pₖ → 0 False statement
- FALSE: a^m/n := (a^1/n)ᵐ extends to negative bases False statement
- FALSE: every convergent series converges absolutely False statement
- FALSE: every rearrangement of a convergent series converges, and to the same sum False statement
- FALSE: if aₖ → 0 then ∑ aₖ converges False statement
- FALSE: limsup aₖ^1/k = limsup aₖ₊₁/aₖ for every positive sequence False statement
- A normal sequence of entourages yields a uniformly continuous pseudometric with controlled dyadic balls Lemma
- Dictionary: for A ⊆ ℝ with the metric d(x,y) = |x-y|, continuity and uniform continuity of f : A → ℝ agree with the metric-space notions, the Lipschitz and Hölder conditions are the metric ones instantiated, and a subset of ℝ is compact in the open-cover sense of ℝ exactly when it is a compact metric subspace Lemma
- Each ‖·‖ₚ is a norm on ℝⁿ, and the induced metrics are exactly d₁, d₂ and d_∞ of the published metric-spaces page Lemma
- For every a > 0, a^1/n → 1 Lemma
…and 25 more results.
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 70 results over 22 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
- J. Lebl, Basic Analysis I (standard reference, not scraped)
- Radicals and rational exponents (Emory University) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Exponentiation (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Nth root (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- W. Rudin, Principles of Mathematical Analysis, 3rd ed., Ch. 1 (standard reference, not scraped)