Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-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.

A zero-angular-momentum Kepler trajectory reaches the force centre in finite time, refuting unconditional global existence

Statement refuted

False statement. Every solution of the attractive inverse-square equation μ r′′=−κ r/∣r∣3 (μ,κ>0) on its maximal interval of definition is defined for all real times and satisfies ∣r(t)∣≥c for some c>0.

The witness has zero angular momentum and reaches the excluded force centre, so the non-radial positive results do not apply. Its inverse-square potential is singular and is not finite-range; this example does not establish the necessity of the simple-turning-point hypothesis in Finite-range scattering: the simple outer turning point, the two global branches and the free tails.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Parameters μ>0, κ>0, the constant A:=(9κ/(2μ))1/3>0, and the curve r:(−∞,1)→R3, r(t):=A(1−t)2/3e1, where e1 is a unit vector.

[L1]

The central-force equation in the radial case: for a curve r=ρ e1 with ρ>0 of class C2, the equation μr′′=−κr/∣r∣3 is equivalent to μρ′′=−κ/ρ2, and the angular momentum μr×r′ vanishes identically (Central-force trajectories: the central-force equation, angular momentum, energy and the effective potential, Ck Euclidean maps and diffeomorphisms).

[L3]

For t<1, A3(1−t)2=9κ2μ(1−t)2 and, equivalently, 2μA9=κA2: this is the defining relation of A, and it is an equality of positive real numbers (multiply A3=9κ/(2μ) by 2μ/(9A2)).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1givenL1L2L3algebra

The curve solves the equation: by [L2], r′′(t)=−2A9(1−t)−4/3e1, so μr′′=−2μA9(1−t)−4/3e1, while −κr/∣r∣3=−κρ−2e1=−κA2(1−t)−4/3e1 because ρ(t)=A(1−t)2/3. By [L3] the two coefficients agree, so μr′′=−κr/∣r∣3 for every t<1; and the angular momentum vanishes identically.

2.1givenstep 1.1L1algebra

Failure of global existence: ρ(t)=A(1−t)2/3→0 as t↑1, and ρ is strictly positive and C2 on (−∞,1). There is no solution of μr′′=−κr/∣r∣3 on an interval containing 1 whose restriction to (−∞,1) equals r: such a solution would be continuous at 1 with r(1)=lim⁡t↑1r(t)=0, and the equation is undefined at the origin (the right-hand side contains r/∣r∣3). Hence the maximal interval of r is (−∞,1), not R.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

Failure of the lower bound: inf⁡t<1ρ(t)=0, so there is no c>0 with ∣r(t)∣≥c on the domain. Together with step 2.1, this refutes the stated universal claim.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources