Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)
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 first excited oscillator state has negative Wigner values

Statement refuted

The assertion to be refuted is: for every 0<ϵ≤1 and every normalized u∈S(R), Wϵ[u](x,ξ)≥0 for all (x,ξ)∈R2.

Assume Countable Choice and 0<ϵ≤1. In the one-dimensional oscillator with m=ω=1, ℏ=ϵ, the normalized first excited state is ψ1ϵ(x)=2ϵ(πϵ)−1/4x e−x2/(2ϵ). Its Wigner function is Wϵ[ψ1ϵ](x,ξ)=1πϵ(2(x2+ξ2)ϵ−1)e−(x2+ξ2)/ϵ. It is strictly negative on the disk x2+ξ2<ϵ/2. Consequently the assertion that every normalized Schwartz vector has a nonnegative Wigner function is false.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice, 0<ϵ≤1, and the one-dimensional oscillator conventions of the Statement.

[A1]

Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice ACω (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

[F1]

H1(y)=2y, g0(y)=π−1/4e−y2/2, and g1=H1g0/2=2 yg0; scaling by ℓ=ϵ gives the displayed normalized oscillator state (Hermite recurrence, Oscillator scaling and exact realization).

[F2]

The Wigner integral uses the normalization and Fourier sign in Schwartz Weyl quantization and Wigner distributions; for u∈S it is real and integrable (Wigner pairing and marginals).

[F3]

Gϵ(ξ):=∫e−y2/(4ϵ)e−iyξ/ϵdy=2πϵ e−ξ2/ϵ (Euclidean Gaussian transform with the 2π normalization).

[F4]

Differentiation under this Gaussian integral is valid because the first two differentiated integrands are dominated by integrable polynomial multiples of e−y2/(4ϵ); dominated convergence justifies the limit (Dominated convergence).

Counterexample

Given: The data of the Statement and [A1], [F1]–[F4].

1.1A1F1algebra

By [F1] and the oscillator scaling ℓ=ϵ, the first excited state is ℓ−1/2g1(x/ℓ)=ϵ−1/42 xϵ π−1/4e−x2/(2ϵ)=2ϵ(πϵ)−1/4xe−x2/(2ϵ). The oscillator realization makes it a normalized Schwartz vector.

1.2F1F2F3F4algebra

Write A2=2ϵ−1(πϵ)−1/2. The product in the Wigner integrand is ψ1ϵ(x+y/2)ψ1ϵ(x−y/2)‾=A2(x2−y24)e−x2/ϵ−y2/(4ϵ). By [F4], Gϵ′′(ξ)=∫(−y2/ϵ2)e−y2/(4ϵ)e−iyξ/ϵdy. Differentiating the explicit Gaussian in [F3] gives ∫y2e−y2/(4ϵ)e−iyξ/ϵdy=−ϵ2Gϵ′′(ξ)=(2ϵ−4ξ2)Gϵ(ξ). Substitution in the Wigner definition [F2] therefore yields Wϵ[ψ1ϵ](x,ξ)=(2πϵ)−1A2e−x2/ϵ(x2Gϵ(ξ)−14(2ϵ−4ξ2)Gϵ(ξ))=1πϵ(2(x2+ξ2)ϵ−1)e−(x2+ξ2)/ϵ. Every factor and sign follows from the displayed negative-sign Fourier convention.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2algebra∎

The exponential and the prefactor 1/(πϵ) are strictly positive. Thus Wϵ[ψ1ϵ](x,ξ)<0 exactly when 2(x2+ξ2)/ϵ−1<0, which is the disk x2+ξ2<ϵ/2. This normalized Schwartz vector refutes universal Wigner nonnegativity.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources