Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck pass
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 spacelike hypersurface of a globally hyperbolic model that is not a Cauchy hypersurface

Statement refuted

Statement refuted: "every spacelike embedded hypersurface of a globally hyperbolic time-oriented smooth Lorentzian four-manifold is a Cauchy set" (Spacelike hypersurfaces, acausal sets, Cauchy sets, domains of dependence and Cauchy horizons clauses (a) and (c), Chronology, causality, strong causality, global hyperbolicity and time functions clause (c)).

Facts & Assumptions

Assume Countable Choice and Dependent Choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω), The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an N-indexed chain) for the general absolutely continuous causal-curve conclusions used here.

Given: The flat model (A,η,N) of The flat model: Minkowski space R^4, its standard Lorentz form, inertial charts and cone sets, written A=R4, with its global inertial chart x=(t,z), the open unit ball B={z∈R3:∣z∣e<1} and the set Σ:={p∈A:t(p)=0, z(p)∈B}, and the point z0∈R3 with ∣z0∣e=2.

[L1]

The flat model is globally hyperbolic and its level sets {t=c} are Cauchy hypersurfaces (The flat model is globally hyperbolic and its inertial level sets are Cauchy hypersurfaces clauses (b), (d)).

[L2]

Along an inextendible future causal curve of A the coordinate t is a strictly increasing surjection onto R (Monotonicity of inertial time and the Lipschitz graph property for causal curves in the flat model clause (c)).

[L3]

On the open neighborhood U=x−1(R×B) of Σ, the smooth chart y=(x1,x2,x3,t) has y(U)=B×R and y(Σ∩U)=B×{0}=y(U)∩(R3×{0}), so Σ is an embedded submanifold; its tangent space is span⁡(∂1,∂2,∂3) with positive definite metric restriction (Embedded submanifolds and slice charts, Spacelike hypersurfaces, acausal sets, Cauchy sets, domains of dependence and Cauchy horizons clause (a)).

[L4]

A Cauchy set meets every inextendible causal curve in exactly one parameter value (Spacelike hypersurfaces, acausal sets, Cauchy sets, domains of dependence and Cauchy horizons clause (c)).

Counterexample

1.1givenL3

(The set is spacelike.) By [L3] the set Σ is an embedded three-dimensional submanifold of A with tangent space spanned by ∂1,∂2,∂3, on which η=diag⁡(1,1,1) is positive definite; hence Σ is a spacelike embedded hypersurface.

1.2givenL2

(An inextendible causal curve missing it.) Define u:R→A, u(s):=x−1(s,z0). This is a smooth curve with constant tangent ∂0=N, which satisfies η(∂0,∂0)=−1<0 and is future-directed by clause (c) of The flat model: Minkowski space R^4, its standard Lorentz form, inertial charts and cone sets, so u is a future timelike (hence causal) curve; its t-coordinate is the identity of R, so it has no point limit at either infinite parameter end: such a limit would force its continuous real time coordinate to have a finite limit. Thus u is inextendible by Causal curves, chronological and causal reachability, and inextendibility clause (d). But t(u(s))=s and z(u(s))=z0 with ∣z0∣e=2>1, so u(s)∉Σ for every s; the parameter set {s:u(s)∈Σ} is empty and in particular not a singleton.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2givenL1L4∎

(Conclusion.) By step 1.2 there is an inextendible causal curve that meets Σ in no parameter value; by [L4] the set Σ is not a Cauchy set, and by step 1.1 it is a spacelike embedded hypersurface, so it is not a Cauchy hypersurface. Since the ambient model is globally hyperbolic by [L1], this refutes the displayed statement: in a globally hyperbolic model a spacelike hypersurface need not be Cauchy.

Remarks

  • Why Cauchy leaves are special. The full inertial level sets {t=c} are Cauchy because t is a strictly increasing surjection onto R on every inextendible future causal curve ([L2]); being an entire level set of a temporal function alone does not imply the Cauchy property. The fragment Σ is achronal and spacelike, but inextendible causal curves outside the spatial ball B never see it.
  • Scope. The example is purely kinematic; no field equation, matter content or measurement enters.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources