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.
Rational powers of a positive base
Definition
Let with and let (The rationals as equivalence classes of pairs of integers).
Every rational has a representative with positive denominator (Every rational has a positive-denominator representative), so write with and a positive integer; a positive integer is the image of a unique natural (The naturals embed in the integers), and we write for that natural too. Define
where is the unique nonnegative -th root of (Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with ) and the outer exponent is an integer power (Integer powers ). The outer power is legitimate because when , so it has an inverse and negative integer exponents are allowed.
Well-definedness. The right-hand side must not depend on which representative
of was chosen. It does not: that is Rational powers do not depend on the representative ↗,
which is recorded in this item's justified_by rather than in its deps, since
it is a statement about the operation defined here and therefore depends on
this definition.
The base must be positive. For the same formula is not a definition at all, because different representatives of the same rational give different answers, or no answer: see FALSE: extends to negative bases, which is exactly the item that justifies the restriction.
Supplementary clause for the base . For and rational (Order on the rationals) the displayed formula still makes sense and still does not depend on the representative: forces , and (Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with applies to every ). So we set for rational . For the expression is left undefined, since has no inverse. This clause is what lets the inequalities later on this page be stated for nonnegative entries rather than for positive ones only.
Remarks
- Consistency with integer powers. If then , (Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with ), and the definition returns as given by Integer powers . So the notation is unambiguous, and rational powers extend integer powers on positive bases. At it returns , so the root notation of Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with is the special case , as intended.
- for every and every , the exponent included. Writing with : the root is positive (Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with ); for the value is a natural power of a positive element, hence positive, which is claim 1 of Monotonicity of and of and covers as well, since ; and for the value is (Laws of integer exponents, claim 2), the inverse of a positive element, hence positive (Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order). Note that Monotonicity of and of is stated for natural exponents only, so it does not by itself settle the negative case; that is what the inverse step is for. The exponent laws are Laws of rational exponents and the order behaviour is Monotonicity of and of .
- The exponent is a rational, never a real. Nothing on this page is a limit, a series or a continuous function, and is computed in finitely many field operations once the root is available. What would be needed to go further, why it is deferred here, and where the library later defines for real are recorded in Why real exponents are deferred on the rational-powers page.
- The convention of Integer powers is untouched: is not covered by the supplementary clause, which asks for . So while for every rational . There is no inconsistency, only the familiar fact that the two-variable function has no continuous extension to , a statement this library cannot even make yet.
Depends on
Existence and uniqueness of -th roots: a unique with
Integer powers
The rationals as equivalence classes of pairs of integers
Every rational has a positive-denominator representative
The naturals embed in the integers
Order on the rationals
Monotonicity of and of
Laws of integer exponents
Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order