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.
One-parameter subgroups are exactly exponentials
Statement
Assume . Let be a finite-dimensional real Lie group with Lie algebra . A smooth curve is a one-parameter subgroup if and only if there is a unique such that
for every . Necessarily . The countable-choice assumption is used exactly through the supplied existence and uniqueness of the one-parameter subgroups .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , a finite-dimensional real Lie group with Lie algebra , and a smooth curve .
is countable choice. The Axiom of Countable Choice ().
The scaling identity is . Exponential scales one-parameter subgroups.
A one-parameter subgroup is a smooth homomorphism . One-parameter subgroup of a Lie group.
Assuming , every determines a unique one-parameter subgroup with , and any one-parameter subgroup having initial velocity is this curve. One-parameter subgroups are integral curves of left-invariant fields.
Proof
Suppose is a one-parameter subgroup, and put . By uniqueness in [F4], , so [F2] gives for every real . If also for every , [F2] identifies this curve with ; differentiating at zero yields .
Conversely, fix . By [F4], is a one-parameter subgroup, and [F2] gives . Hence every exponential curve is a one-parameter subgroup in the sense of [F3].
Lie groups are nonempty and boundaryless. If , then and the only exponential curve is constant; in dimension one the proof is unchanged. The curves have domain all of , so there is no finite endpoint. No metric or nondegeneracy condition occurs. The only choice use is the stated , inherited through [F2] and [F4]; taking one derivative adds no choice. Step 1.1 proves the forward implication and uniqueness, and step 1.2 proves the reverse implication.
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
- Alexander Kirillov Jr., An Introduction to Lie Groups and Lie Algebras (standard reference, not scraped)