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.

Asymptotic ends and ADM surface integrals — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

The isotropic Schwarzschild end has energy Mc squared

Physical scope

A fixed-chart calculation on the standard isotropic Schwarzschild slice data; no positive-mass theorem or empirical statement is asserted.

Example

Let M>0 be a mass in kilograms and put m=GNM/c2, a length. On the end E={x∈R3:r=∣x∣>m/2}, take the standard isotropic Schwarzschild slice data u=1+m2r,h=u4δ,K=0. Here “time-symmetric” means precisely K=0. With the fixed Cartesian end chart and unit asymptotic time normalization x0=ct, the ADM energy is Mc2 joules.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The stated isotropic Schwarzschild initial data with M>0, m=GNM/c2, and the fixed-chart ADM convention.

[F1]

A fixed-chart asymptotically Euclidean end has hij=δij+aij/r+O2(r−1−ϵ), Kij=O1(r−2), and the ADM energy is the limit of the specified surface integral multiplied by c4/(16πGN) (A specified asymptotically Euclidean ADM end).

[F2]

If h=u4δ and u=1+m/(2r)+O2(r−2) with u>0, then the fixed-chart ADM limit exists and equals c4m/GN (ADM energy of a conformally flat end).

[A1]

M>0, m=GNM/c2>0, u>0 on E, and the supplied initial data have K=0; the metric form is the standard isotropic Schwarzschild slice representation recorded in the cited full texts.

Verification

Given: [F1], [F2], [A1], and the data in the Example.

1.1F1F2A1algebra

The remainder in u=1+m/(2r)+ρ is ρ=0, so ρ=O2(r−2). Also u>1 on E and K=0 satisfies K=O1(r−2). Hence the end meets the hypotheses of [F1] and [F2].

2.1F2step 1.1algebra∎

By [F2], EADM=c4m/GN. Substituting m=GNM/c2 gives EADM=c4(GNM/c2)/GN=Mc2. The result is the exact model calculation for this fixed end and time normalization.

Remarks

The source texts use geometric units in the surface formula; the factor c4/GN restores SI energy units. This calculation does not prove a positivity theorem.

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

A compact interior change preserves the ADM limit but changes scalar curvature

Physical scope

A smooth Riemannian metric example on a fixed asymptotic end; no Einstein constraint, completeness, or physical-solution claim is made.

Example

Fix a length R0>0, set E={x∈R3:∣x∣>R0}, and let x∗=(3R0,0,0). Define ϕ(x)={exp⁡ ⁣(−11−∣x−x∗∣2/R02),∣x−x∗∣<R0,0,∣x−x∗∣≥R0. For 0<ε<1, set u0=1, uε=1+εϕ, h0=u04δ, hε=uε4δ, and K0=Kε=0 on E. Both data sets have the same fixed-chart ADM energy, 0, but their scalar curvatures differ at x∗.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Euclidean end E, the smooth bump candidate ϕ, 0<ε<1, and the conformal metrics and tensors in the Example.

[F1]

The fixed-chart ADM energy depends only on h and equals the prescribed limit of its Cartesian surface integrand; K=0 satisfies the required decay (A specified asymptotically Euclidean ADM end).

[F2]

For a positive smooth conformal factor u, Su4δ=−8u−5Δδu (Scalar curvature of a conformally Euclidean three-metric).

[F3]

A positive conformal factor u=1+m/(2r)+O2(r−2) has EADM=c4m/GN (ADM energy of a conformally flat end).

[F4]

If two metrics agree outside a compact subset of the same fixed end chart and both limits exist, their ADM energies are equal (Compact interior changes leave a fixed ADM integral unchanged).

[A1]

R0>0, x∗=(3R0,0,0), and 0<ε<1; all coordinates are Euclidean length coordinates.

Verification

Given: [F1]–[F4] and [A1].

1.1A1constructalgebra

Put y=x−x∗ and q=1−∣y∣2/R02. For q>0, each derivative of e−1/q is a polynomial in q−1 times e−1/q, and q−Ne−1/q→0 as q↓0 for every integer N≥0. Therefore extension by zero at q≤0 is C∞, so ϕ is a smooth bump supported in BR0(x∗)‾. Since ∣x∗∣=3R0, this compact support lies in {∣x∣≥2R0}⊂E. Also 0≤ϕ≤e−1, hence both u0 and uε are positive.

2.1F1F3F4step 1.1algebra

The metrics h0 and hε agree outside the compact support of ϕ, and both have K=0. The conformal end result [F3] with m=0 gives existence of the ADM limit for h0 and EADM(h0)=0. For r>4R0, ϕ=0 on an open neighborhood, so hε=h0=δ there and their first Cartesian derivatives agree. Thus their surface integrals in [F1] agree for every R>4R0, which proves existence of the hε limit. Both metrics satisfy the end decay because they equal δ there. Now [F4] applies and gives EADM(hε)=EADM(h0)=0.

3.1F2step 1.1algebra∎

At x∗, q=1, ϕ(x∗)=e−1, ∂iq=0, and ∂i∂jq=−2δij/R02. Differentiating ϕ=e−1/q at this point gives ∂iϕ(x∗)=0 and ∂i∂jϕ(x∗)=−2e−1δij/R02, so Δδϕ(x∗)=−6e−1/R02. The flat metric h0=δ has scalar curvature 0, while [F2] gives Shε(x∗)=−8(1+εe−1)−5εΔδϕ(x∗)=48εe−1R02(1+εe−1)5>0. Thus the scalar curvatures differ at x∗ although the ADM limits agree.

Remarks

The example changes a metric on an exterior manifold with an inner boundary and does not impose the Einstein constraint equations or completeness. It is not a counterexample to a positive-mass theorem with its own hypotheses.

Sources