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.

Delta-square is outside the product contract

Statement refuted

The universal assertion that the wavefront product criterion defines δ02 is false. In Rn, n≥1, the Dirac distribution δ0 has WF⁡(δ0)={(0,ξ):ξ≠0}, so the criterion excludes its product with itself. Moreover, for any nonnegative unit-mass radial mollifier ρ∈Cc∞(Rn) supported in B1(0), the ordinary smooth squares ρε2, where ρε(x)=ε−nρ(x/ε), have no distributional limit as ε↓0 without subtraction: for every test function f equal to one near zero and all sufficiently small ε>0, ⟨ρε2,f⟩=ε−n∫Rnρ(y)2 dy⟶+∞. This does not rule out a separately specified renormalized extension; it shows that neither the stated product criterion nor this unrenormalized mollifier limit supplies one.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: ACω, n≥1, and the product and mollifier conventions in the Statement.

[A1]

Assume only Countable Choice ACω for the Fourier convention (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω), Product and pullback under wavefront transversality).

[F1]

δ0(φ)=φ(0) for φ∈D(Rn) (Dirac delta and its derivatives).

[F2]

A nonzero covector is outside WF⁡(u) only if some localized Fourier transform decays rapidly in an open conic neighborhood (Wavefront and positive-frequency Hadamard data).

[F3]

The wavefront product criterion requires that no common-base pair of opposite nonzero covectors lies in the two wavefront sets (Product and pullback under wavefront transversality).

[F4]

A radial mollifier has ρ≥0, ∫ρ=1, ρ∈Cc∞, and supp⁡ρ⊂B1(0) (A radial mollifier family in Rn).

Counterexample

Given: [A1] and [F1]–[F4].

1.1A1F1F2algebra

Choose a compactly supported smooth cutoff χ equal to one near 0. By [F1], χδ0=δ0 and χδ0^(ξ)=⟨δ0,χ(x)e−2πix⋅ξ⟩=1 for every ξ. This constant function is not rapidly decreasing in any open cone about a nonzero covector, so [F2] gives (0,ξ)∈WF⁡(δ0) for every ξ≠0.

1.2F4construct

Since ρ≥0 and ∫ρ=1 by [F4], it is positive at some point. Continuity gives a ball on which ρ2 is bounded below by a positive constant, so ∫ρ2>0. Compact support and smoothness make ρ bounded, and 0≤ρ2≤∥ρ∥∞ρ with ∫ρ=1 gives ρ2∈L1.

2.1F3step 1.1

For every ξ≠0, both (0,ξ) and (0,−ξ) belong to WF⁡(δ0) by step 1.1. The hypothesis of the product criterion [F3] therefore fails for (u,v)=(δ0,δ0); the theorem does not define δ02.

3.1F4step 1.2algebra∎

Let f∈D(Rn) equal one on a neighborhood of 0. Since supp⁡ρ⊂B1(0), for all sufficiently small ε, f(εy)=1 on supp⁡ρ. Substitution x=εy in the Lebesgue integral of the smooth compactly supported square gives ⟨ρε2,f⟩=∫ε−2nρ(x/ε)2f(x) dx=ε−n∫ρ(y)2 dy. By step 1.2 this tends to +∞, whereas convergence in D′ would make the pairing with the fixed test f converge to a finite scalar. Thus these unrenormalized squares have no distributional limit.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources