Alphabeta Math
False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passverified 2026-08-04 (gpt-5.6-sol-codex-subscription)
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.

FALSE: the intersection of two connected subspaces is connected

Statement

False claim: if AA and BB are connected subsets of a topological space XX (Separation of a topological space, connected and disconnected spaces, clopen sets, and connected subsets, Subspace topology: the traces of the open sets, its closed sets and its bases, the continuity of the inclusion, and the characteristic property of a map into a subspace) then ABA \cap B is connected.

The corresponding statement for unions is true under a meeting hypothesis (A union of connected subspaces with a point in common is connected, and so is a union of a family in which every member meets a fixed connected member); there is no such repair for intersections, and the witness below has ABA \cap B \neq \varnothing, so nonemptiness is not what is missing.

Witness. In X=R2X = \mathbb{R}^2 with the product topology (For n1n \ge 1 the product topology on nn copies of the usual topology of R\mathbb{R} is the metric topology of dd_\infty on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, and hence also of d1d_1 and d2d_2, so Rn\mathbb{R}^n as a product and Rn\mathbb{R}^n as a metric space are one space, The product set iIXi\prod_{i \in I} X_i of functions choosing a point in each factor, the projections, the box topology, and the product topology as the initial topology of the projections; the empty product is a one-point space) put

S0:={0}×[0,1],S1:={1}×[0,1],T0:=[0,1]×{0},T1:=[0,1]×{1},S_0 := \{0\} \times [0,1], \qquad S_1 := \{1\} \times [0,1], \qquad T_0 := [0,1] \times \{0\}, \qquad T_1 := [0,1] \times \{1\},

and let A:=T0S0S1A := T_0 \cup S_0 \cup S_1 and B:=T1S0S1B := T_1 \cup S_0 \cup S_1: the three sides of the unit square other than the top, and the three other than the bottom. Both are connected, and AB=S0S1A \cap B = S_0 \cup S_1 is disconnected, being two disjoint closed segments.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: R2\mathbb{R}^2 with the product topology and the sets S0,S1,T0,T1,A,BS_0, S_1, T_0, T_1, A, B above; subsets carry the subspace topology.

[A3]

A union of connected subsets each meeting a fixed connected subset, together with that subset, is connected (A union of connected subspaces with a point in common is connected, and so is a union of a family in which every member meets a fixed connected member, claim 2).

Refutation

technique · contradiction
1.1

Suppose, for contradiction, that the claim holds: the intersection of two connected subsets is connected.

assume-contra
1.2

Each of S0,S1,T0,T1S_0, S_1, T_0, T_1 is a connected subset of R2\mathbb{R}^2: for instance S0S_0 is the image of [0,1][0,1] under t(0,t)t \mapsto (0,t), whose components are a constant map and the identity, hence continuous by [A2], and [0,1][0,1] is connected by [A1]; the other three are the images of t(1,t)t \mapsto (1,t), t(t,0)t \mapsto (t,0) and t(t,1)t \mapsto (t,1).

A1A2
1.3

Each of S0,S1,T0,T1S_0, S_1, T_0, T_1 is closed in R2\mathbb{R}^2 by [A5], being a product of two closed subsets of R\mathbb{R}, so each equals its own closure.

A5
1.4

AB=S0S1A \cap B = S_0 \cup S_1: each of S0,S1S_0, S_1 lies in both AA and BB; and a point of T0T_0 not in S0S1S_0 \cup S_1 has second coordinate 00 and first coordinate strictly between 00 and 11, so it lies in neither T1T_1 nor S0S_0 nor S1S_1, hence not in BB; symmetrically for T1T_1.

given
2.1

A=T0S0S1A = T_0 \cup S_0 \cup S_1 is connected: T0T_0 is connected by step 1.2, and S0S_0 and S1S_1 are connected and meet T0T_0, in (0,0)(0,0) and (1,0)(1,0) respectively; so [A3] applies with T0T_0 as the fixed connected set. Symmetrically B=T1S0S1B = T_1 \cup S_0 \cup S_1 is connected, S0S_0 and S1S_1 meeting T1T_1 in (0,1)(0,1) and (1,1)(1,1).

step 1.2A3
2.2

S0S_0 and S1S_1 are nonempty, disjoint, and separated in R2\mathbb{R}^2: by step 1.3 each is its own closure, and S0S1=S_0 \cap S_1 = \varnothing because a common point would have first coordinate both 00 and 11. So ABA \cap B is disconnected by [A4] and step 1.4.

step 1.3step 1.4A4
3.1

By step 2.1 both AA and BB are connected, so the supposed claim of step 1.1 makes ABA \cap B connected, contradicting step 2.2. The claim is therefore false.

step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2discharge-contradiction

Remarks

  • Nonemptiness is not the missing hypothesis. In the witness AB=S0S1A \cap B = S_0 \cup S_1 is nonempty, and it is even a union of two connected sets — they simply do not meet. Nor does convexity of the pieces help: each of AA and BB is a union of three straight segments.

  • Why unions behave and intersections do not. [A3] works because a point common to two connected sets welds them: a continuous two-valued function must agree on both. An intersection has no such welding point available, and indeed the intersection of two connected sets can be split as badly as one likes; taking longer chains of segments makes ABA \cap B a union of any number of disjoint segments while keeping AA and BB connected.

  • Both witnesses are as simple as the plane allows. AA and BB are the boundary of the unit square with one side removed, in the two ways of doing so that leave the two vertical sides. Each is path-connected, hence connected by Every path-connected space is connected, and every path component lies inside a component and Paths, path-connected spaces and path components, so the failure has nothing to do with the pathologies of the zigzag curve elsewhere on this page.

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: 142 results over 23 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