Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)
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 one-form with ω∧dω≠0 has no local exact multiple

Statement refuted

Every nowhere-zero C2 one-form on an open subset of R3 has a nonzero local integrating factor making it exact.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A local integrating factor means a nowhere-zero C1 function μ with μω=dS for some C2 scalar S on a neighborhood.

[F1]

A nonsingular Pfaff one-form and its horizontal paths: the coordinate exterior derivative and wedge product are defined by antisymmetrized partials and alternating products.

[F2]

An exact nonzero multiple satisfies the Pfaff condition: any such exact nonzero multiple satisfies ω∧dω=0.

Counterexample

1.1givenF1

On R3 with coordinates (x,y,z) take ω=dz−y dx. It is smooth and nowhere zero because the dz coefficient is 1.

2.1F1step 1.1algebra

Its exterior derivative is dω=dx∧dy, so ω∧dω=(dz−y dx)∧dx∧dy=dz∧dx∧dy, a nonzero coordinate volume form.

3.1givenF2step 2.1discharge-contradiction∎

If a local μ,S as in the refuted claim existed on any open neighborhood, [F2] would force ω∧dω=0 there, contradicting step 2.1 at every point. Therefore no such local exact multiple exists.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources