Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passverified 2026-08-02 (claude-opus-5)
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.

A sequence in a metric space has at most one limit

Statement

Let (X,d)(X,d) be a metric space (Metric space: d(x,y)=0d(x,y) = 0 iff x=yx = y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric) and let (xk)(x_k) be a sequence in XX (Convergence of a sequence in a metric space: xkxx_k \to x iff d(xk,x)0d(x_k, x) \to 0 in R\mathbb{R}). If xkpx_k \to p and xkqx_k \to q, then p=qp = q.

So a convergent sequence in a metric space has exactly one limit, and the notation limkxk\lim_k x_k is unambiguous.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A metric space (X,d)(X,d), a sequence (xk)(x_k) in XX, and points p,qXp, q \in X with xkpx_k \to p and xkqx_k \to q.

[A1]

Convergence: xkpx_k \to p means that for every rational ε>0\varepsilon > 0 there is KNK \in \mathbb{N} with d(xk,p)<εd(x_k,p) < \varepsilon for all kKk \ge K (Convergence of a sequence in a metric space: xkxx_k \to x iff d(xk,x)0d(x_k, x) \to 0 in R\mathbb{R}, Limits and Cauchy sequences of reals); and d(x,y)0d(x,y) \ge 0 for all x,yXx, y \in X, so in particular d(xk,p)0d(x_k,p) \ge 0 and its absolute value is itself (Nonnegativity of a metric is a consequence of the other axioms, not an axiom, Absolute value in an ordered field, Basic properties of the absolute value).

[L1]

Density of the rationals: strictly between any two reals lies a rational, so below any real η>0\eta > 0 there is a rational ε\varepsilon with 0<ε<η0 < \varepsilon < \eta (The rationals embed densely in the reals).

[L2]

Halving. For a real c>0c > 0 set 2:=1+12 := 1 + 1 and c/2:=c21c/2 := c \cdot 2^{-1}. Then 2>02 > 0, so 202 \ne 0 and 21>02^{-1} > 0 (The multiplicative identity is positive, Order is preserved by adding a constant and by adding inequalities, Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order, Ordered field); hence c/2>0c/2 > 0 (Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication); and c/2+c/2=c(21+21)=c(221)=cc/2 + c/2 = c(2^{-1} + 2^{-1}) = c(2 \cdot 2^{-1}) = c (Field).

[L3]

Separation (M1) and the triangle inequality (M3) of dd, together with symmetry (M2) (Metric space: d(x,y)=0d(x,y) = 0 iff x=yx = y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric).

[L4]

Trichotomy of the order of R\mathbb{R}, and transitivity: a<ba < b and bab \le a cannot both hold (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Ordered field).

[L5]

Adding two inequalities: a<ba < b and c<dc < d give a+c<b+da + c < b + d (Order is preserved by adding a constant and by adding inequalities).

Proof

technique · contradiction
1.1

Suppose, for contradiction, that pqp \ne q.

assume-contra
2.1

By (M1) d(p,q)0d(p,q) \ne 0, and d(p,q)0d(p,q) \ge 0, so c:=d(p,q)>0c := d(p,q) > 0 by trichotomy; put η:=c/2\eta := c/2, a positive real with η+η=c\eta + \eta = c.

step 1.1A1L2L3L4
3.1

Fix a rational ε\varepsilon with 0<ε<η0 < \varepsilon < \eta, and use the convergence hypotheses at ε\varepsilon to fix K1,K2NK_1, K_2 \in \mathbb{N} with d(xk,p)<εd(x_k,p) < \varepsilon for kK1k \ge K_1 and d(xk,q)<εd(x_k,q) < \varepsilon for kK2k \ge K_2.

step 2.1A1L1choose
4.1

Let mm be any natural with mK1m \ge K_1 and mK2m \ge K_2, for instance m:=K1+K2m := K_1 + K_2; then d(xm,p)<εd(x_m,p) < \varepsilon and d(xm,q)<εd(x_m,q) < \varepsilon.

step 3.1choose
5.1

By symmetry and the triangle inequality, c=d(p,q)d(p,xm)+d(xm,q)=d(xm,p)+d(xm,q)<ε+ε<η+η=cc = d(p,q) \le d(p,x_m) + d(x_m,q) = d(x_m,p) + d(x_m,q) < \varepsilon + \varepsilon < \eta + \eta = c.

step 4.1step 2.1L3L5
6.1

Step 5.1 asserts c<cc < c, which trichotomy forbids; the supposition of step 1.1 is therefore untenable and p=qp = q.

step 5.1L4discharge-contradiction

Remarks

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 51 results over 23 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources