Alphabeta Math
False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck 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 product topology and the box topology agree on every product

Statement

False claim: for every family of topological spaces (Xi)i∈I the product topology and the box topology on ∏i∈IXi are the same topology (The product set ∏i∈IXi 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).

The claim is correct for a finite index set. It fails when the index set is infinite and the factors have enough open sets, under the hypotheses of claim 3 of The box topology is finer than the product topology, the two agree for a finite index set in ZF, and, assuming the Axiom of Choice for nonempty factors, the box topology is strictly finer whenever infinitely many factors have a nonempty proper open subset, which assumes the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice); the witness written out below needs no choice principle at all. The refutation below writes down the standard witness explicitly, in RN=∏k∈NR with every factor carrying the usual topology (The absolute value makes R a metric space: d(x,y)=∣x−y∣ is a metric, its open balls are the intervals (x−r,x+r), and it is unbounded, Metrizable space: a topological space whose topology is induced by some metric; metrizability is topological, the metric is not): the shrinking box

B  :=  ∏k∈N(−1k+1, 1k+1)

is open in the box topology and is not open in the product topology. No choice principle is used, the factors of B being given by a formula.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The index set N, the product P:=∏k∈NR with each factor carrying the usual topology, the box B of the statement, and the point z∈P with zk=0 for every k. Here 1/(k+1) abbreviates 1/ι(k+1), the inverse of the canonical natural (The canonical natural ι(n)=n⋅1F of a field).

[L1]

ι(k+1)≥1>0 for every k∈N, and ι is strictly increasing, hence injective (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing, The canonical natural ι(n)=n⋅1F of a field).

[L2]

If 0<u≤v then 0<1/v≤1/u (Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order).

[L3]

For every natural n≥1 and reals a0,…,an−1 the set {a0,…,an−1} has a maximum (Every nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum and a minimum).

[L4]

If U belongs to a topology and x∈U, then U is open; and a topology is a family of subsets of the underlying set (Topology on a set, open and closed sets, clopen sets, the closed-set axiomatisation, and the coarser/finer comparison).

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1

For every k∈N: 1/(k+1)>0 by [L1] and [L2], so 0∈(−1/(k+1), 1/(k+1)) by [A2]; hence z∈B.

A2L1L2
1.2

For every k∈N: 1/(k+1)≤1, since 1≤ι(k+1) by [L1] and [L2] applied with u=1 and v=ι(k+1).

L1L2
1.3

Each factor (−1/(k+1), 1/(k+1)) is open in the usual topology of R, being a bounded open interval, so B is a box with open factors and hence open in the box topology.

A1A2
1.4

Suppose B were open in the product topology. Then by [A1] there is a basic product-open O=∏kOk with z∈O⊆B, and Ok=R for every k outside a list j0,…,jn−1 with n∈N.

A1L4assume-hyp
2.1

There is j∈N with Oj=R: if n=0 the list is empty and j:=0 serves; if n≥1 then by [L3] the set {ι(j0),…,ι(jn−1)} has a maximum, attained at some index m0<n, and j:=jm0+1 satisfies ι(j)>ι(jm) for every m<n by [L1], hence j≠jm for every m<n.

step 1.4L1L3
3.1

Let y∈P be the point with yj:=1 and yk:=zk=0 for k≠j. Then y∈O, since yj=1∈R=Oj and yk=zk∈Ok for k≠j.

step 1.4step 2.1
4.1

y∉B: by step 1.2 one has 1/(j+1)≤1=yj, so yj∉(−1/(j+1), 1/(j+1)) by [A2].

step 1.2step 3.1A2
5.1

Steps 3.1 and 4.1 contradict O⊆B from step 1.4, so B is not open in the product topology; by step 1.3 it is open in the box topology, so the two topologies on P are different and the claim is false.

step 1.3step 1.4step 3.1step 4.1∎

Remarks

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

56 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