Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-23 (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.

Bounded-domain Stokes residual estimate — worked interpretation

Physical scope

Exact rigid-rotation comparison on a bounded ball with a rotating no-slip wall. It exhibits a nonzero centripetal residual absorbed by the pressure while the two velocity fields coincide; it is not an example of a nonzero velocity discrepancy or of an approximation-error estimate against the full momentum equation retaining material acceleration beyond the stated residual bounds. A zero-trace Poincare constant is an explicit input, not a derived claim.

Example

Assume ACω. In SI units, let R>0 metres, ρ0>0 kilograms per cubic metre, μ>0 pascal-seconds, Ωr>0 inverse seconds, and p0 pascals. On the ball BR={(x,y,z)∈R3:x2+y2+z2<R2}, let the spherical wall rotate rigidly about the z-axis with angular velocity (0,0,Ωr) and impose no slip. Define

uNS=uS=(−Ωry,Ωrx,0),pS=p0,pNS=p0+ρ0Ωr22(x2+y2).

The two velocity fields are smooth and divergence-free, have the same wall velocity, and satisfy respectively the stationary constant-density incompressible Navier–Stokes equation and the restricted steady Stokes comparison equation with zero body acceleration. Let CBR>0 be an explicitly assumed constant such that ∥v∥L2(BR)≤CBR∥∇v∥L2(BR) for every C1 zero-trace vector field; this example does not establish a value for it. Their velocity difference is zero, while the convective residual is f=ρ0Ωr2(x,y,0)=∇(pNS−pS). The residual estimates therefore hold for this supplied Poincare input. This exact example has nonzero pressure residual but zero velocity error; it does not demonstrate a nonzero velocity discrepancy.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume the SI conventions, the rotating wall and no-slip condition, the parameter values, and the fields stated in the Example.

[F1]

Classical frames, primitive quantities and SI units: a spatial vector transforms in Euclidean space, velocity has units m s−1, pressure has units Pa, and μ,ρ0 have units Pa s and kg m−3.

[F2]

Specified wall, thermal, periodic and initial data: for a moving solid wall with velocity wb, the no-slip condition is u=wb on the wall.

[F3]

Bounded-domain Stokes residual estimate — conditional physical prediction: for already-existing smooth Navier–Stokes and restricted Stokes comparison fields with the same boundary velocity and a zero-trace Poincare constant CΩ, the velocity and gradient differences obey the two stated residual estimates.

[F4]

The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω): ACω means every sequence of nonempty sets has a choice function; the example carries this exact assumption from the bounded-domain theorem.

[A1]

The displayed fields and pressures are exact model fields, not measured data; Ωr, ρ0, μ, and R are selected inputs.

[A2]

The stated constant CBR satisfies the displayed zero-trace Poincare inequality; its value is assumed and not proved in this example.

Verification

1.1givenF1F2A1algebra

Direct differentiation gives ∇⋅uNS=∇⋅uS=0 and ΔuNS=ΔuS=0. The material acceleration is (u⋅∇)u=(−Ωr2x,−Ωr2y,0), while ∇pNS=ρ0Ωr2(x,y,0) and ∇pS=0. Therefore ρ0(uNS⋅∇)uNS+∇pNS−μΔuNS=0 and ∇pS−μΔuS=0. The rotating spherical wall has velocity (−Ωry,Ωrx,0), equal to both fluid traces.

2.1givenA2F3F4step 1.1algebra∎

Set w=uNS−uS=0 and π=pNS−pS=ρ0Ωr2(x2+y2)/2. Then −μΔw+∇π=∇π=ρ0Ωr2(x,y,0)=−ρ0(uNS⋅∇)uNS=f. The stated Poincare bound [A2] and all strong-solution hypotheses of [F3] hold. Applying [F3] with the carried assumption [F4] gives ∥∇w∥2=0≤(CBR/μ)∥f∥2 and ∥w∥2=0≤(CBR2/μ)∥f∥2.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels