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.
Free maximal ideals of C(N) and beta N
Example
Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice). Let be discrete, so that is the ring of all real sequences. Then there is a maximal ideal of which is not of the form for any : the cofinite filter on extends to a free ultrafilter , and
is a maximal ideal that is free. Consequently the maximal ideals of the ring of all continuous real functions on are in set-theoretic bijection with the points of the Stone–Čech compactification , while the fixed ideals correspond exactly to (Gelfand-Kolmogorov for rings of continuous functions), and . No topology on the maximal-ideal set is asserted or reconstructed here.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Choice, the discrete space , the ring of all real sequences, and the cofinite filter on .
For a Tychonoff space the maximal ideals of are exactly the ideals with unique, and is fixed if and only if ; for one has (Gelfand-Kolmogorov for rings of continuous functions, The Axiom of Choice).
For discrete every subset is a zero set, because the characteristic function of any subset is continuous, and the z-filters are exactly the ordinary filters on ; the maximal ideals correspond to the filters that are maximal, and the fixed maximal ideals are the (Maximal ideals of C(X) and zero set ultrafilters).
Under the Axiom of Choice every proper filter on a set extends to an ultrafilter (The ultrafilter lemma, from the Axiom of Choice: every filter extends to an ultrafilter, The Axiom of Choice).
A subset of a compact Hausdorff space that is compact is closed, and with the discrete topology is not compact since the cover by singletons has no finite subcover; is dense in . [algebra]
Verification
The cofinite filter is a proper filter: it contains , omits (whose complement is infinite), and is closed under finite intersections and upward inclusion.
By [L3] extend to an ultrafilter ; since , no singleton belongs to (a singleton has infinite complement, so it is not in the cofinite filter, and its complement is in , so the singleton is not), that is, is free.
is a maximal ideal of by [L2], and it is not fixed: if for some , then for the characteristic function one has by freeness, so while , so , a contradiction.
By [L1] the maximal ideals of are the with uniquely determined, and by [step 2.1] there is a maximal ideal that is not fixed. By [L1] its point lies outside , so . This proves the point-set parametrisation claimed in the example; [L1] supplies no topology on the maximal-ideal set, and none is inferred.
Equivalently, directly: is dense in the compact space by [L4], so if then would be compact, contradicting [L4].
Remarks
- The unbounded function is never evaluated at infinity. Both the ideal and the identification use only zero sets; the witness is bounded, and no value of an unbounded sequence at a point of is asserted.
- Free ultrafilters on exist under AC, and the resulting free maximal ideals are the algebraic shadow of the points at infinity of .
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
18 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.