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.
Discreteness: is the immediate successor
Statement
For all : (Order on the natural numbers). Consequently there is no with : the successor is the immediate successor of .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The order , with meaning and (Order on the natural numbers), and addition with , (Addition of natural numbers).
Every nonzero natural is a successor: (Every nonzero natural number is a successor).
(the left successor law, Left successor law for addition) and (the addition recursion).
Cancellation: (Addition is cancellative).
for every (Peano axiom P1) (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
Addition is commutative: (Addition is commutative).
Proof
Forward: if then and , so for some , with since would give ; then [L1] and [L2], hence .
Backward: if then , so [L2], hence ; and , since would give , so by [L5] and by [L3], contradicting [L4]; therefore .
No satisfies : if then by the equivalence, so , contradicting ; thus is the immediate successor.
Depends on
Used by
- A rational root of xᵏ = m is an integer: if k ≥ 1, m ∈ ℤ, x ∈ ℚ and xᵏ is the image of m, then x is the image of an integer Corollary
- Every nonzero integer n is u ∏_i<r pᵢ with u ∈ {1,-1} and every pᵢ prime; u and r are determined by n, and the list is determined up to a permutation Corollary
- A nonnegative non-monotone sequence for which ∑ aₖ and ∑ 2ᵏ a_2ᵏ behave differently Counterexample
- If 1 were admitted as a prime, uniqueness would fail: 6 = 2 · 3 = 1 · 2 · 3 = 1 · 1 · 2 · 3, lists of different lengths that no permutation matches Counterexample
- In the multiplicative monoid H = {1, 4, 7, 10, …} of positive integers one more than a multiple of 3, the element 100 has two genuinely different factorisations into irreducibles, 4 · 25 and 10 · 10 Counterexample
- ℤ and {n + 1/n : n ≥ 2} are disjoint closed subsets of ℝ at distance 0, so the set-to-set distance is not a metric Counterexample
- Compositions and weak compositions of a natural number into a fixed number of parts Definition
- Nondecreasing, increasing, nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone, and eventually monotone sequences Definition
- The p-adic valuation vₚ(a) of a nonzero integer: the greatest k ∈ ℕ with pᵏ ∣ a Definition
- 2 is prime, and it is the only even prime: every even integer n > 2 is composite Example
- Consecutive Fibonacci numbers are coprime, and for every m ∈ ℕ the Euclidean algorithm on (Fₘ₊₃, Fₘ₊₂) takes exactly m+1 divisions, with quotient 1 in the first m of them and quotient 2 in the last Example
- Eisenstein proves xⁿ-2 irreducible over ℚ for every positive n Example
- For every n ∈ ℕ there are n consecutive composite integers: with N := ∏_j<n(j+2), each of N+2, …, N+n+1 is composite Example
- No rational squares to 3 or to 6, and none cubes to 2: three instances of the rational-root corollary Example
- Reduction modulo 2 proves x³+17x+391 irreducible over ℚ Example
- The 2-adic absolute value gives an ultrametric on ℚ, in which every triangle is isosceles and every point of a ball is a centre Example
- The block sequence 1/1; 1/2, 2/2; 1/3, 2/3, 3/3; … has subsequential limit set exactly [0,1] Example
- The Cauchy sequences of rationals form a commutative ring that is not an integral domain: two eventually-constant sequences with disjoint supports multiply to zero Example
- The polynomial x²-2 is irreducible over ℚ Example
- The subsets of ℕ containing a tail form the Fréchet filter, and it is proper and not an ultrafilter Example
- The trigonometry-free oscillator ψ(x) = inf_n ∈ ℤ |x - n| is well defined and attained at a nearest integer, takes values in [0, 1/2], vanishes exactly on ℤ, equals 1/2 at half-integers, and is 1-periodic Example
- FALSE, once the ultrafilter lemma is available: every ultrafilter is principal False statement
- FALSE: every Fermat number 2^2ⁿ + 1 is prime False statement
- FALSE: for all sets A and B with B having at least two elements, A × B is strictly larger than A False statement
- FALSE: for every finite list p₀, …, pₙ₋₁ of distinct primes, p₀ ⋯ pₙ₋₁ + 1 is prime False statement
- FALSE: limits preserve strict inequalities False statement
- FALSE: n² + n + 41 is prime for every natural number n False statement
- (ℤ, ·, 1) is a commutative monoid whose group of units is {1, -1}; equivalently u ∣ 1 holds exactly for u = 1 and u = -1 Lemma
- A finite sum is unchanged by a permutation of its index range: ∑_k<n a_π(k) = ∑_k<n aₖ for every bijection π : n → n Lemma
- A strictly increasing index map satisfies nₖ ≥ k Lemma
- Bolzano-Weierstrass alone forces the Archimedean property, so it needs no separate Archimedean hypothesis Lemma
- Every integer n > 1 has a prime divisor; indeed the least divisor of n that exceeds 1 is prime Lemma
- Every real sequence has a monotone subsequence (the peak / rising-sun lemma) Lemma
- Every subgroup of (ℤ, +) is ⟨ n ⟩ = nℤ for exactly one natural number n Lemma
- Every subset of an at most countable set is at most countable Lemma
- Finite sums re-indexed along an injection, with a zero term deleted, and concatenated; and the closure properties of linear independence: an independent list is injective and never 0_V, its sublists are independent, a list is independent exactly when it is injective with linearly independent image, and every subset of a linearly independent set is linearly independent Lemma
- For a prime p and a nonzero integer a: p^vₚ(a) ∣ a and p^vₚ(a)+1 ∤ a; pᵏ ∣ a holds exactly for k ≤ vₚ(a); vₚ(a) ≥ 1 exactly when p ∣ a; vₚ(1) = vₚ(-1) = 0; and vₚ(p) = 1 Lemma
- For positive integers a and b: a ∣ b if and only if vₚ(a) ≤ vₚ(b) for every prime p Lemma
- If d ∣ a and a ≠ 0 then d ≠ 0 and |d| ≤ |a|; hence the set of divisors of a nonzero integer is bounded above by |a| Lemma
- Integer part: for every real x there is exactly one integer m with m ≤ x < m + 1 Lemma
…and 20 more results.
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 20 results over 12 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
- T. Tao, Analysis I, 3rd ed., §2.1-2.3 (Peano axioms, recursion, arithmetic) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Well-ordering principle (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- W. Aitken, MATH 378 Ch. 1: The Peano Axioms (CSU San Marcos) (standard reference, not scraped)
- B. Kaya, MATH 320 Set Theory (METU lecture notes) (standard reference, not scraped)