Alphabeta Math
False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)
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.

ZFC proves there is an inaccessible cardinal

Statement

False assertion: ZFC proves that a strongly inaccessible cardinal exists.

The refutation is conditional: if ZFC is consistent, there is no such proof. This makes no assertion of Con(ZFC).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: ZFC finite-proof metatheory. For a fixed purported proof, reflected its finite axiom list into the least inaccessible rank segment, checked actual cardinalhood of the internal witness, and built a contradiction without a CTM-from-consistency assumption.

[F1]

An inaccessible rank segment models ZFC: An inaccessible rank segment satisfies each ZFC axiom, and small-cardinal inaccessibility is absolute.

[F2]

Soundness for arbitrary set signatures: Finite derivations are sound for a set model of their finitely many axiom instances.

[F3]

Relativization agrees with induced set satisfaction: Fixed-formula relativization agrees with the actual set structure satisfaction.

Refutation

1.1

Fix, externally, a purported finite ZFC derivation p of the sentence E asserting that an inaccessible exists. Only finitely many ZFC axiom instances occur as assumptions in p; call their conjunction A_p. Soundness F2 applied to this fixed finite derivation is a theorem of ZF saying that any nonempty set structure satisfying those instances satisfies E. No assertion about a truth predicate for V is involved.

F2F3
2.1

Work now inside ZFC under E. Choose the least inaccessible kappa by ordinal minimization below one witness. F1 proves each of the finitely many instances in A_p relativized to V_kappa; combining these finite proofs and F3 makes its nonempty membership structure a model of A_p. Step 1.1 gives that V_kappa satisfies E. Thus some alpha in V_kappa is internally an inaccessible ordinal. Transitivity gives an actual ordinal alpha<kappa. Its internal cardinalhood is actual cardinalhood: any external bijection between alpha and a smaller ordinal has a graph of rank at most alpha plus finitely many successors, hence belongs to V_kappa, contradicting internal cardinalhood if it existed. F1's inaccessibility absoluteness now applies to this actual cardinal and makes alpha an actual inaccessible, contradicting leastness of kappa.

F1F3step 1.1
3.1

The preceding construction is a finite ZFC derivation of E implies contradiction, depending on the fixed finite proof p. Append it to p, which derives E, and infer a contradiction in ZFC. Therefore the existence of such p implies inconsistency of ZFC. Contraposition yields exactly the stated conditional nonprovability. This neither extracts a transitive model from Con(ZFC) nor invokes a uniform universe satisfaction relation.

F2step 2.1

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

12 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