Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
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.

Hamiltonian phase, complete-domain flow and reference measure — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

The examples separate recurrence from ergodicity, weak mixing from strong mixing, and fine reference-measure entropy from entropy of a chosen finite partition. The Chacon example is a discrete probability-preserving system and claims no Hamiltonian realization. The oscillator and rotor calculations are explicit mathematical models; neither is presented as an observation.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Weak mixing need not imply strong mixing

Statement refuted

Weak mixing implies strong mixing for every probability-preserving transformation.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A measure-preserving probability system, the local definitions in Ergodicity and mixing for a selected probability map, and full AC.

[A1]

Full AC is assumed by the normalized Chacon construction and its published mathematical supplier (The Axiom of Choice).

[F1]

Ergodicity and mixing for a selected probability map: weak mixing uses N−1∑n<N∣dn(E,F)∣→0, while strong mixing requires dn(E,F)→0 for each fixed measurable pair.

[F2]

Chacon transformation is weakly mixing but not mixing: under full AC the normalized three-cut one-spacer Chacon map on completed Lebesgue probability is weakly mixing in the absolute-Cesàro sense but is not strongly mixing. Its proof supplies the weak-mixing argument.

[F3]

Chacon tower height correlations obstruct mixing: for the fixed set E=[0,2/9) and unbounded tower heights hr, μ(E∩T−hrE)−μ(E)2≥2/81>0.

Counterexample

Given: [A1], [F1]–[F3].

1.1A1F1F2construct

Choose the normalized three-cut one-spacer Chacon transformation supplied by [F2], on its completed Lebesgue probability space. The exact convention in [F1] matches the supplier's absolute-Cesàro definition, so this system is weakly mixing.

2.1A1F1F3step 1.1algebra∎

By [F3], the correlations for the fixed pair (E,E) stay at least 2/81 above zero along hr→∞. Strong mixing in [F1] would force these same correlations to tend to zero, which they do not. Hence this probability-preserving system is not strongly mixing and refutes the statement.

Remarks

This is a discrete measure-preserving example from ergodic theory. No Hamiltonian realization is claimed.

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedOpen item page →

Two oscillators are recurrent but nonergodic on their total shell

Statement refuted

Every Hamiltonian time map on every compact regular finite-measure energy shell is ergodic for its normalized shell measure.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume full AC for the regular-shell measure supplier. Choose m1,m2,ω1,ω2>0 and a total energy E>0.

[A1]

Full AC is the exact assumption in Invariant energy-weighted and regular-shell probabilities for its regular-shell clause (The Axiom of Choice).

[F1]

Hamiltonian phase, complete-domain flow and reference measure: on M=R4 use ω=dq1∧dp1+dq2∧dp2 and the Hamiltonian flow convention ιXHω=dH.

[F2]

Invariant energy-weighted and regular-shell probabilities: under full AC, the stated regular compact positive-energy shell has a finite positive invariant probability measure.

[F3]

Hamiltonian recurrence under the exact finite-measure hypothesis: every fixed sampled map preserving a finite shell measure has almost-everywhere recurrence on each measurable subset.

[F4]

Ergodicity and mixing for a selected probability map: ergodicity requires every strictly invariant measurable set S, with ΦΔ−1S=S, to have probability zero or one.

Counterexample

Given: [A1], the parameters above, and [F1]–[F3].

1.1A1F1F2givenalgebra

Define H(q,p)=∑i=12(pi2/(2mi)+miωi2qi2/2) on R4. The Hamilton equations are q˙i=pi/mi and p˙i=−miωi2qi, whose explicit oscillatory solutions exist for every real time. For J=(0,∞), ∇H vanishes only at the origin and hence nowhere on H−1(J). For every compact K⊂J, H−1(K) is closed and bounded because H is a positive-definite quadratic form, hence compact in R4. The level ΣE=H−1({E}) is therefore a nonempty compact regular shell with the exact hypotheses of [F2].

2.1F1F2step 1.1algebra

Let E1(q1,p1)=p12/(2m1)+m1ω12q12/2 and put S={z∈ΣE:E1(z)<E/2}. The equations in step 1.1 conserve E1 because ddtE1=(p1/m1)(−m1ω12q1)+(m1ω12q1)(p1/m1)=0. Hence every time map satisfies ΦΔ−1S=S. The set S is a nonempty relatively open subset of ΣE; for instance points with (q1,p1)=(0,0) lie in it. Its complement contains a nonempty relatively open subset with E1>E/2. The regular-shell graph density ∣∇H∣−1dA is positive on every graph chart, so both open subsets have positive shell measure. Since the whole shell measure is finite and positive by [F2], the normalized probability of S lies strictly between zero and one.

3.1A1F2F3F4step 2.1∎

The invariant measurable set S has intermediate probability, so [F4] rules out ergodicity of ΦΔ for every Δ>0. By [F2], the normalized shell law is a finite invariant probability; apply [F3] to that same law and sampled map to obtain almost-everywhere recurrence. This is a recurrent Hamiltonian system that is not ergodic, refuting the statement.

Remarks

The two oscillator energies are conserved separately. Compactness and Liouville preservation therefore do not imply that a time map explores its entire energy shell.

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedOpen item page →

Coarse Shannon entropy rises and falls in a reversible rotor

Statement refuted

For every reversible Hamiltonian flow, every finite measurable partition, and every initial density, the partition Shannon entropy is nondecreasing in time.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Let θ∈R/Z be a position on the circle, I∈R an action coordinate, and choose ν>0, I0>0, and a0>0.

[F1]

Hamiltonian phase, complete-domain flow and reference measure: on T∗S1 the canonical symplectic form is dθ∧dI; a complete invariant Borel domain carries the induced reference measure m0=∣dθ∧dI∣/a0.

[A1]

Adopt countable choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)) for the reference measure and the transport supplier [F2]; no regular-shell premise is used.

[A2]

A flow on a symplectic manifold is reversible here if there is a smooth involution J (so J2=id⁡) with J∗ω=−ω and J∘Φt∘J=Φ−t for every real t.

[F2]

Liouville probability transport and constant fine entropy: on an open complete invariant domain, a finite-valued normalized Borel L1(m0) density is transported by ρt=ρ0∘Φ−t and preserves the fine −k∫ρlog⁡ρ dm0 whenever the absolute entropy integral is finite.

Counterexample

Given: [A1], the convention [A2], [F1]–[F2], and the positive parameters above.

1.1A2F1givenconstructalgebra

Use the Hamiltonian H(θ,I)=νI, with θ dimensionless, I in J s, and ν in s−1, so H is in J. The convention in [F1] gives θ˙=ν and I˙=0. Thus Φt(θ,I)=(θ+νt mod 1,I) is complete. The smooth involution J(θ,I)=(−θ mod 1,I) satisfies J∗(dθ∧dI)=−dθ∧dI and JΦtJ(θ,I)=(θ−νt mod 1,I)=Φ−t(θ,I), proving reversibility in [A2]. Use the open invariant domain R=S1×(I0,I0+a0)⊂T∗S1; it is preserved by J, complete under the flow, and its reference measure has total mass a0−1∫01dθ∫I0I0+a0dI=1. Define on this open domain the density ρ0=4 1[0,1/4)×(I0,I0+a0) relative to m0∣R. Its integral is 4⋅(1/4)⋅(a0/a0)=1; excluding the two action endpoints changes no reference-measure mass.

2.1F1step 1.1algebra

Partition the open domain into C1=[0,1/2)×(I0,I0+a0) and C2=[1/2,1)×(I0,I0+a0). The transported density has angular support [νt,νt+1/4) modulo one. At t=0 its cell probabilities are (1,0). At t=3/(8ν) its support is [3/8,5/8), so each cell receives angular length 1/8 and the probabilities are (1/2,1/2). At t=1/(2ν) its support is [1/2,3/4), so the probabilities are (0,1).

3.1step 2.1algebra

For any fixed k>0, the coarse Shannon entropy SC(t)=−k∑j=12pj(t)log⁡pj(t), with 0log⁡0=0, takes the values 0, klog⁡2, and 0 at those three times. It therefore decreases between 3/(8ν) and 1/(2ν), contradicting the proposed monotonicity. Here k is a mathematical scale; choosing k=kB gives the usual entropy units J/K without changing the calculation.

4.1A1F2step 1.1algebra∎

The initial density satisfies ∫R∣ρ0log⁡ρ0∣ dm0=4log⁡4⋅m0(supp⁡ρ0)=log⁡4<∞. By [F2] its fine reference-measure entropy remains constant, even though the displayed coarse partition entropy changes.

Remarks

The angular coordinate is periodic; no global real-valued angle function is assumed. The calculation concerns an explicit mathematical coarse partition, not an observed entropy trace or a universal thermodynamic law.

Sources