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.
Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with
Statement
Let be a complete ordered field (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)). For every with and every with there is a unique with and (Integer powers ); we write
Moreover when , and .
This generalises the published Square roots exist: a unique with ; the positives are , and the case is not new. That theorem already produces the unique with , and it is cited as such throughout the library; the notation introduced here is the same number. What is new is the passage to general : the completed square that drives the argument has no direct analogue, and its place is taken by the factorisation of and the resulting Lipschitz estimate (Factorisation of , and the resulting Lipschitz estimate).
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A complete ordered field (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)), that is, an ordered field (Ordered field) with the least-upper-bound property; an element ; and a natural , with written (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing, The unique embedding of ℚ into an ordered field).
Least-upper-bound property: every nonempty subset of that is bounded above (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set) has a least upper bound, and it is unique, so the notation is legitimate (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Suprema and infima are unique).
Epsilon characterisation of the supremum: if is nonempty and bounded above and , then for every there is with (Epsilon characterisation of the supremum).
Monotonicity of powers (Monotonicity of and of ): is strictly increasing on for , hence injective there; implies and implies ; and implies .
Lipschitz estimate (Factorisation of , and the resulting Lipschitz estimate): if and then .
Order arithmetic: adding a constant preserves the order and for , (Order is preserved by adding a constant and by adding inequalities, Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication), both stated there for the STRICT order alone, so where a is added or scaled below the move is that statement together with the case of equality, settled by trichotomy (Ordered field); , which is proved in The multiplicative identity is positive and stated by none of those three, hence ; and , since gives (Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order, claim 2).
Trichotomy: for exactly one of , , holds; consequently any two elements have a minimum (Ordered field).
A product with a zero factor vanishes: (Multiplication by zero: ).
Proof
If then satisfies and , since for ; so existence holds in that case and we assume from here on.
Uniqueness holds as soon as a root exists: if satisfy , then strict monotonicity of on the nonnegatives rules out both and , so by trichotomy.
Define ; then , because and , so is nonempty.
The element is an upper bound of : since and we have and , so any satisfies , whence and .
By the least-upper-bound property exists in ; moreover because , and because is an upper bound and is the least one.
Put ; then , so and , and every with satisfies .
Assume, for contradiction, that ; by trichotomy either or .
(Case .) Put , which is since and , and put , so that and ; then , so the Lipschitz estimate gives , hence and , while contradicts that is an upper bound of .
(Case .) Here , since would give ; put and , so that and ; then , so the Lipschitz estimate gives , hence ; applying the epsilon characterisation with produces with , whence by strict monotonicity, contradicting .
Both cases of the disjunction in step 3.2 are impossible, so the assumption fails and ; this is the unique nonnegative -th root of by step 1.2, it satisfies when because would force , and at the element itself is a nonnegative solution of , so ; writing for it, the case recovers the already published of Square roots exist: a unique with ; the positives are .
Depends on
- Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)
- Epsilon characterisation of the supremum
- Suprema and infima are unique
- Monotonicity of $x \mapsto x^n$ and of $n \mapsto a^n$
- Factorisation of $b^n - a^n$, and the resulting Lipschitz estimate
- Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set
- Order is preserved by adding a constant and by adding inequalities
- Square roots exist: a unique $\sqrt{a} \ge 0$ with $(\sqrt{a})^2 = a$; the positives are $\{x^2 : x \neq 0\}$
- Integer powers $a^m$
- Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication
- Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order
- The multiplicative identity is positive
- Multiplication by zero: $0 \cdot a = 0$
- Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing
- The unique embedding of ℚ into an ordered field
- Ordered field
Used by
- Raabe is Kummer with ζₖ = k+1: for positive terms, liminf (k+1)(aₖ/aₖ₊₁ - 1) > 1 gives convergence and limsup < 1 gives divergence Corollary
- ∏_j ≥ 0 (1 + (-1)ʲ/√j+2) has partial products tending to 0 although ∑_j ≥ 0 (-1)ʲ/√j+2 converges Counterexample
- With aⱼ = (-1)ʲ/√j+1 convergent and bⱼ = (-1)ʲ bounded but not monotone, ∑ aⱼ bⱼ = ∑ 1/√j+1 diverges Counterexample
- x ↦ √x on (0,1] is differentiable with unbounded derivative and is not Lipschitz there, so the boundedness hypothesis in the Lipschitz corollary cannot be dropped Counterexample
- Rational powers aʳ of a positive base Definition
- ∏_j ≥ 0 (1 - 1/(j+2)) has partial products 1/(n+1), which tend to 0, so the product does not converge in the sense used here Example
- ∑_j ≥ 0 (-1)ʲ/(j+1) converges conditionally, with sum strictly between 1/2 and 1 Example
- |x-c|^-1/2 has a convergent improper integral across an interior singularity Example
- √x is absolutely continuous but not Lipschitz on [0,1] Example
- ∫₀¹ x^-1/2 dx=2 Example
- A positive sequence making all three inequalities of the ratio-to-root chain strict Example
- A worked fixed point on [1,2] for the map x ↦ (x + 2/x)/2, from the one-dimensional fixed point theorem Example
- Condensation reduces ∑ 1/kᵖ to a geometric series with ratio 2¹⁻ᵖ Example
- For a natural n ≥ 1, the derivative of x ↦ x^1/n on (0,∞) is 1/ι(n)x^1/n - 1, obtained from the inverse rule applied to x ↦ xⁿ; in particular (√x)' = 1/(ι(2)√x) Example
- H(x) = 2√x on [0,1]: H is continuous, H' is unbounded on (0,1], and H' is therefore not Riemann integrable Example
- On [0,1] the function x^β is β-Hölder and is α-Hölder for no rational α > β, so the Hölder classes are strictly nested Example
- The four standard limits n^1/n → 1, a^1/n → 1, n^α/(1+p)ⁿ → 0 and xᵏ/k! → 0, computed Example
- The integral test applied to ∑ 1/ι(k+1)ᵖ for rational p>0, cross-checked against the published p-series theorem Example
- The intermediate value theorem gives a second proof that every nonnegative real has an n-th root, applied to xⁿ on a closed bounded interval Example
- The mean value theorem gives |√x - √y| ≤ 1/ι(2) |x - y| for x, y ≥ 1, so the square root is Lipschitz with constant 1/2 on [1,∞) Example
- The n-th root as a continuous inverse: for a natural n ≥ 1 the map x ↦ xⁿ is continuous and strictly increasing on [0,∞) with image [0,∞), so its inverse x ↦ x^1/n is continuous and strictly increasing Example
- The period-three pattern 1, 1, -2 has partial sums in {0,1,2}, so ∑ aₖ/(k+1) converges by Dirichlet's test although the alternating series test does not apply Example
- FALSE: ∏ (1 + pₖ) converges whenever pₖ → 0 False statement
- FALSE: a^m/n := (a^1/n)ᵐ extends to negative bases False statement
- FALSE: every convergent series converges absolutely False statement
- FALSE: every real number has a real square root False statement
- FALSE: every rearrangement of a convergent series converges, and to the same sum False statement
- FALSE: if aₖ → 0 then ∑ aₖ converges False statement
- FALSE: limsup aₖ^1/k = limsup aₖ₊₁/aₖ for every positive sequence False statement
- FALSE: the image of a closed subset of ℝ under a continuous real function is closed False statement
- For every a > 0, a^1/n → 1 Lemma
- For every p > 0 and every positive rational α, n^α/(1+p)ⁿ → 0 Lemma
- Laws of rational exponents Lemma
- Monotonicity of r ↦ aʳ and of a ↦ aʳ Lemma
- n^1/n → 1 Lemma
- Rational powers do not depend on the representative Lemma
- Truncated integrals of rational powers Lemma
- Why real exponents are deferred on the rational-powers page Remark
- For aₖ > 0: liminf aₖ₊₁/aₖ ≤ liminf aₖ^1/k ≤ limsup aₖ^1/k ≤ limsup aₖ₊₁/aₖ Theorem
- For rational p > 0, ∑ 1/kᵖ converges iff p > 1 Theorem
…and 8 more results.
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 63 results over 17 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
- J. Lebl, Basic Analysis I (standard reference, not scraped)
- Radicals and rational exponents (Emory University) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Nth root (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- W. Rudin, Principles of Mathematical Analysis, 3rd ed., Ch. 1 (Thm 1.21) (standard reference, not scraped)
- T. Tao, Analysis I, 3rd ed., §5.6 (standard reference, not scraped)