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.
Every cycle in a connected plane domain is null-homologous in that domain
Statement
False claim. Every complex chain which is a cycle with trace in a complex domain is null-homologous in that domain.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The annulus and the contour on , taken as the chain with the single term .
A cycle with trace in an open is null-homologous in when for every (Null-homologous cycles and homologous cycles in an open set).
A complex domain is homologically simply connected when every cycle with trace in it is null-homologous in it (Homologically simply connected complex domains).
The annulus is a complex domain, and the unit circle in it is a cycle with , so is not null-homologous in that annulus (A connected plane domain that is not homologically simply connected).
For , and , the contour on is a closed complex contour with index for and for (A circle traversed times has winding number inside and outside).
If is a cycle with trace in an open , null-homologous in , and is holomorphic on , then (Cauchy's theorem for a null-homologous cycle).
For a positively oriented circle with , (The normalized integral around a positively oriented circle centred at a is 1).
A single closed contour with coefficient is a cycle whose trace is that contour's trace (Complex chains, their traces, and cycles) and whose index is that contour's winding number (Integration over a complex chain and the index of a chain).
Nonvanishing quotients of functions complex differentiable at a point are complex differentiable there (Linearity, product, reciprocal, and quotient rules for complex derivatives).
Refutation
By [L3] the annulus is a complex domain and the chain is a cycle with trace ; by [L4] and [L7] its index at is .
The point lies in , and step 1.1 gives , so [L1] denies that is null-homologous in ; the claim is therefore false, and by [L2] it is exactly the claim that every complex domain is homologically simply connected.
The hypothesis is not removable from Cauchy's theorem either: is holomorphic on by [L8], since , and by [L6], so the conclusion of [L5] fails for this cycle in this domain.
Depends on
- Null-homologous cycles and homologous cycles in an open set
- Homologically simply connected complex domains
- A connected plane domain that is not homologically simply connected
- A circle traversed $k$ times has winding number $k$ inside and $0$ outside
- Cauchy's theorem for a null-homologous cycle
- The normalized integral around a positively oriented circle centred at a is 1
- Complex chains, their traces, and cycles
- Integration over a complex chain and the index of a chain
- Linearity, product, reciprocal, and quotient rules for complex derivatives
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
64 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
- J. Lebl, Complex Analysis, Ch. 4 §4.3 (standard reference, not scraped)