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.
The symmetric Stone model has no componentwise proper selector
Statement
No function in the symmetric model of The Good-Tree-Watson symmetric Stone model assigns to every distinguished metric component a nonempty proper subset of that component.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A function with domain and a proper nonempty subset of for every .
Membership in is hereditary symmetry: has a support in the normal filter, with of size below (The Good-Tree-Watson symmetric Stone model, Symmetric forcing systems, supports, and hereditarily symmetric names).
In Claim 1.3 of the source, the reflection/identity choice is made separately at each first coordinate. Explicitly, if , is a reflection of , and is a permutation of , the coordinate map which is the identity off the -block and sends to is an allowed automorphism. It fixes and sends to . [given, source, Automorphisms acting on forcing names]
The symmetry lemma sends a forced statement to its image under a forcing automorphism; if two conditions are compatible, their common extension cannot force contradictory statements (Symmetry lemma for forcing automorphisms, Forcing preorders, compatibility and filters).
Proof
Suppose is such a selector. Choose a hereditarily symmetric name , a condition forcing that has the stated selector property, and a support of size below such that every member of fixes .
The projection of to the first coordinate has size below , so choose outside it. Strengthen to a condition and choose distinct ground-model reals so that forces and .
Let be the set of third coordinates occurring in at first coordinate . Then . Choose a disjoint of the same cardinality and a permutation of interchanging and and fixing the complement. Let be reflection about , and let be the coordinate-local automorphism from [F2] using and at and the identity elsewhere.
The automorphism lies in because it is the identity outside the -block, so . It fixes and swaps with . By [F3], therefore forces and .
The conditions and are compatible. On every coordinate whose first index is not , is the identity, so the two conditions agree on their common domain. At first index , every third coordinate used by lies in , whereas every third coordinate used by lies in the disjoint set , so their domains are disjoint there. Hence is a common extension.
The common extension inherits from the assertion and from the assertion , a contradiction. Therefore no componentwise nonempty proper selector belongs to .
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
17 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
- C. Good, I. J. Tree, and W. S. Watson, On Stone's theorem and the axiom of choice (standard reference, not scraped)