Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-09-05 rests on unproved material (inherited)
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.

Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Global sections are left exact but need not preserve epimorphisms

Statement

Let X be a topological space. If

0FFF

is exact in sheaves of abelian groups on X, then

0Γ(X,F)Γ(X,F)Γ(X,F)

is exact. However, there exists an epimorphism of sheaves of abelian groups on some space X whose induced map on global sections is not surjective.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A topological space X.

[F1]

Global sections are sections over the whole space: Γ(X,F)=F(X) (Sections, restrictions, and global sections of a presheaf).

[L2]

Exactness of sheaves means image equals kernel at each interior term (Exact sequences of sheaves).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Suppose 0FFF is exact. By [L1], the kernel of the map Γ(X,F)Γ(X,F) is the section group of the kernel sheaf at X. By [L2], that kernel sheaf is the image of FF, so its sections over X are exactly the image of Γ(X,F)Γ(X,F). Together with [F1], this is the displayed left exactness.

F1L1L2given
1.2

For the failure of surjectivity, let X=S1, let C be the sheaf of continuous real-valued functions on S1, and let Z be the subsheaf of locally constant integer-valued functions. Let Q be the quotient sheaf obtained by sheafifying the presheaf VC(V)/Z(V). Every germ of a section of Q is represented locally by a continuous real-valued function, so the canonical map CQ is locally surjective and hence an epimorphism of sheaves.

F1construct
1.3

Cover the circle by the arcs U0=S1{(1,0)} and U1=S1{(1,0)}. Choose continuous angle functions θ0:U0(1/2,1/2) and θ1:U1(0,1) with e2πiθi(z)=z. On one connected component of U0U1 the difference θ1θ0 is 0, and on the other it is 1, so the classes of θ0 and θ1 agree in the quotient presheaf and glue to a global section qΓ(X,Q). If q had a lift gΓ(X,C), then gθi would be an integer-valued continuous function on the connected arc Ui, hence a constant ni. On the two components of U0U1 this would force n0n1 to be both 0 and 1, a contradiction. Thus Γ(X,C)Γ(X,Q) is not surjective.

constructcontradiction
2.1

Step 1.1 gives left exactness, and step 1.3 gives an epimorphism whose global sections map is not surjective.

step 1.1step 1.3

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

9 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