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: constant continuous invariants characterize measure ergodicity
Statement
The assertion that a probability-preserving continuous map is measure ergodic whenever all of its everywhere invariant continuous real functions are constant is false. On the circle, doubling has only constant everywhere invariant continuous functions, but is not ergodic for . This atomic counterexample is choice-free, and therefore also holds under countable choice.
Facts & Assumptions
Use only the choice-free metric and map clauses defining the circle and . The circle, rotations and the doubling map.
A probability-preserving map is ergodic when each strictly invariant measurable set has measure zero or one. Ergodicity relative to an invariant measure.
Dirac set functions are probabilities without a choice assumption. A Dirac set function is a probability measure.
The natural numbers are cofinal in the reals. Every complete ordered field is Archimedean.
Refutation
Given: The assertion that a probability-preserving continuous map is measure ergodic whenever all of its everywhere invariant continuous real functions are constant is false. On the circle, doubling has only constant everywhere invariant continuous functions, but is not ergodic for . This atomic counterexample is choice-free, and therefore also holds under countable choice.
For from [F1], , and . The measure displayed in the statement is a Borel probability by [F3] and finite additivity of the weighted sum of measures; countable additivity follows by commuting a finite sum with increasing partial sums. For every Borel , , so it is invariant. Continuity of gives its Borel measurability.
Put . Each inverse image is Borel since is continuous and is closed, so is Borel. A point lies in exactly when it eventually maps to zero. If it does, then so does its image, since zero is fixed; conversely if its image eventually maps to zero, the point does one step later. Thus . The point zero is in , while and stay in their two-cycle and never reach zero. Therefore , which violates [F2].
Now let continuous real satisfy at every circle point. Iteration shows for , since . For any put . Then , so in the circle metric: by induction and [F4] gives . Continuity yields . Hence all the stated continuous invariants are constant while the invariant probability is nonergodic. No Lebesgue measure, countable union of countable sets, or choice principle is used; the sets and sequences are explicitly defined.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
19 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
- E–W ergodicity definition and doubling example; explicit measure specialization (standard reference, not scraped)