Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
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.

The Gaussian family attains the position-momentum bound in the massive model

Physical scope

An exact model computation for the spin-0 massive particle model of the framework: the normalized Gaussian preparation, its position and momentum outcome densities, the spreads sigma/sqrt(2) and hbar/(sigma sqrt(2)) and the product hbar/2, and the linear dependence of its centered position and momentum vectors that realizes the equality case of the position-momentum preparation relation. The example uses the model's own sharp outcome laws and the cited mathematics; it computes no dynamics, models no measurement, records no empirical value and claims no characterization of all equality states.

Example

Adopt the state and composition postulate P1, which assigns the ray of a unit vector as a pure preparation, the observable and probability postulate P2, and the massive-particle model postulate P5 read through The massive spin-s particle model of the framework: state space, operators, units and frame readings for a spinless particle (s=0, r=1) of mass parameter m>0. Assume the Axiom of Choice and the Axiom of Countable Choice (The Axiom of Choice, The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)), as required by the spectral probability and moment suppliers used below. Fix a width σ>0 and define ψσ(x):=(πσ2)−3/4e−∣x∣2/(2σ2),x∈R3, with momentum width σp:=ℏ/σ and momentum representative Uψσ under the model's momentum transform U. Then:

(i) ψσ∈S(R3;C) is a unit vector, so P1 assigns its ray [ψσ] as a pure preparation; ψσ∈D(Qj)∩D(Pk) for all j,k, and Pjψσ=iℏσ−2xjψσ;

(ii) the position outcome law of Qj has density (πσ2)−1/2e−t2/σ2 in the coordinate t=xj, with mean 0 and variance σ2/2, so ΔψσQj=σ/2;

(iii) Uψσ=ψσp, that is (Uψσ)(p)=(πσp2)−3/4e−∣p∣2/(2σp2); the momentum outcome law of Pk has density (πσp2)−1/2e−pk2/σp2, with mean 0 and variance σp2/2=ℏ2/(2σ2), so ΔψσPk=ℏ/(σ2);

(iv) for every j, ΔψσQj ΔψσPj=ℏ2, and the centered vectors are linearly dependent with vanishing real part of their pairing: Qjψσ=−iσ2ℏPjψσ,Re⁡⟨Qjψσ,Pjψσ⟩=0, so the equality case of The position-momentum preparation relation of the massive spin-s model clause (c) is realized.

The computation is one family of preparations in the model; it is not a characterization of all preparations attaining ℏ/2, involves no dynamics, no detection model and no empirical value.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The postulates P1 and P2 and the model P5 read through The massive spin-s particle model of the framework: state space, operators, units and frame readings with r=1; the Axiom of Choice and the Axiom of Countable Choice; a width σ>0; the action constant ℏ>0; the vector ψσ; the momentum transform U; a coordinate j or k.

[F1]

Heat kernel. For t>0 the function Γ(x,t)=(4πt)−n/2e−∣x∣2/(4t) on Rn is in C∞, satisfies ∫RnΓ(x,t) dx=1 (The heat kernel on Rn and its causal extension, Normalisation, parabolic scaling, heat equation and derivative bounds for the heat kernel), and has absolutely integrable first and second moments with ∫RnxiΓ(x,t) dx=0 and ∫RnxixjΓ(x,t) dx=2tδij (First and second Gaussian heat-kernel moments).

[F2]

Gaussian Fourier transform and momentum transform. With the 2π-normalized unitary Plancherel transform one has F2(e−πt∣x∣2)(ξ)=t−n/2e−π∣ξ∣2/t for t>0 (Euclidean Gaussian transform with the 2π normalization); the model's momentum transform satisfies U=DℏF2 with Dℏg(p)=(2πℏ)−3/2g(p/(2πℏ)) and (Uφ)(p)=(2πℏ)−3/2∫e−ip⋅x/ℏφ(x) dx for φ∈L1∩L2 (Momentum Fourier Jacobian: the unitary momentum representation clauses (a),(c), The momentum representation of the componentwise kinematics clause (a)).

[F3]

Outcome laws of the model. For a unit class ψ the position law of Qj is μψQj(B)=∫xj−1(B)∣ψ(x)∣2 dx and the momentum law of Pk is μψPk(B)=∫{pk∈B}∣(Uψ)(p)∣2 dp (Position and momentum outcome laws of the massive spin-s model clauses (a) and (c), Assigned sharp observables and the outcome law of the framework clause (b)).

[F4]

Moments and spreads. For a unit vector in the domain of the operator the mean and variance of the outcome law exist and equal the quadratic-form mean and the squared norm of the centered vector (Mean, second moment and variance of an assigned observable in a preparation clauses (a) and (b), Preparation variance and spread of an assigned sharp observable clauses (b) and (c)).

[F5]

Position-momentum relation. For every unit ψ∈D(Qj)∩D(Pj) one has ΔψQjΔψPj≥ℏ/2, with equality if and only if the centered vectors are linearly dependent and their pairing has vanishing real part (The position-momentum preparation relation of the massive spin-s model clauses (a) and (c)).

[F6]

Schwartz functions and weak derivatives. A smooth function f:R3→C lies in S(R3;C) exactly when all seminorms sup⁡x∣xα∂βf(x)∣ are finite (Schwartz space and its seminorms). A C1 function has its classical partial derivatives as locally integrable weak derivatives (Classical derivatives agree with weak derivatives). When those derivatives are in L2, their classes give the model's momentum-domain membership. We distinguish a smooth function from its almost-everywhere L2 class, using the same symbol when passing to that class.

[F7]

Product integration. Integrals of nonnegative measurable functions on product spaces may be iterated (Tonelli's theorem for nonnegative measurable functions on a sigma-finite product), and ∫Re−u2du=π (The Gaussian integral ∫−∞∞e−x2 dx=π).

[F8]

Choice in the spectral laws and moments. The Axiom of Choice is the spectral theorem's stated hypothesis for constructing the spectral projection-valued measures of the self-adjoint operators; the moment suppliers also state the Axiom of Choice and Countable Choice. Thus the Born-law and moment steps below are conditional on these assumptions. The integrations and Gaussian Fourier calculation use the separate measure and Fourier suppliers [F1], [F2] and [F7].

Verification

technique · identify $|\psi_{\sigma}|^{2}$ with a heat-kernel slice so that normalisation and all moments come from the heat-kernel items, transform the Gaussian with the published Gaussian Fourier lemma and the model's normalisation, and read the equality case of the position-momentum relation from the explicit centered vectors

Given: The data of the example and [F1]-[F8].

1.1givenF1F6algebra

[The preparation] With t:=σ2/4 one has ∣ψσ(x)∣2=Γ(x,σ2/4), so [F1] gives ∥ψσ∥2=1. Repeated differentiation gives ∂βψσ=pβψσ with a polynomial pβ: start with p0=1 and use pβ+ek=∂kpβ−σ−2xkpβ. Each monomial of xαpβ has modulus at most ∣x∣m for some nonnegative integer m. For c=1/(2σ2)>0, rme−cr2 is bounded on r≥0: for m=0 it is at most 1, and for m>0 its maximum occurs at r=m/(2c). Thus all Schwartz seminorms are finite, proving ψσ∈S by [F6]. Moreover [F1] gives ∥xjψσ∥22=∫xj2Γ(x,σ2/4) dx=σ2/2. The classical derivative ∂jψσ=−σ−2xjψσ is consequently in L2 and is the weak derivative by [F6]. The model's maximal domains therefore contain this class in every D(Qj) and D(Pk), and Pjψσ=−iℏDjψσ=iℏσ−2xjψσ. This proves (i).

2.1step 1.1F1F3F4F7F8algebra

[Position law and spread] By [F3], [F7] and step 1.1, the law of Qj has density fj(t)=∫R2∣ψσ(x⊥,t)∣2 dx⊥=1πσ2e−t2/σ2. By [F1] the first moment of this density vanishes and its second moment equals the one-dimensional heat-kernel second moment 2⋅(σ2/4)=σ2/2, so by [F4] the mean is 0 and the variance is σ2/2; hence ΔψσQj=σ/2. This is (ii).

2.2step 1.1F2algebra

[Momentum representative] Write ψσ=(πσ2)−3/4e−πt0∣x∣2 with t0=1/(2πσ2). By [F2], F2ψσ(ξ)=(πσ2)−3/4t0−3/2e−π∣ξ∣2/t0, and substituting t0−3/2=(2πσ2)3/2 and π/t0=2π2σ2 gives F2ψσ(ξ)=23/2π3/4σ3/2e−2π2σ2∣ξ∣2. By [F2], Uψσ(p)=(2πℏ)−3/2F2ψσ(p/(2πℏ)); its coefficient is (2πℏ)−3/223/2π3/4σ3/2=(σ2/(πℏ2))3/4=(πσp2)−3/4 and its exponent is −2π2σ2∣p∣2/(4π2ℏ2)=−∣p∣2/(2σp2) with σp=ℏ/σ. This is the displayed Gaussian Uψσ=ψσp.

3.1step 2.1step 2.2F1F3F4F8algebra

[Momentum law and spread] The momentum law density of Pk is, by [F3] and step 2.2, the k-th marginal (πσp2)−1/2e−pk2/σp2 of ∣ψσp∣2; by the same heat-kernel moment computation as in step 2.1 with σ replaced by σp, its mean is 0 and its variance is σp2/2=ℏ2/(2σ2), so ΔψσPk=ℏ/(σ2). This is (iii).

4.1step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1F4F5F8algebra∎

[Saturation and equality case] Multiplying the two spreads of steps 2.1 and 3.1 gives ΔψσQjΔψσPj=(σ/2)(ℏ/(σ2))=ℏ/2, the lower bound of [F5]. The centered vectors are Qjψσ−0=Qjψσ and Pjψσ−0=Pjψσ because both means vanish, and step 1.1 gives Qjψσ=xjψσ=−iσ2ℏ Pjψσ, a linear dependence. With the inner product linear in its first argument and Pjψσ=iℏσ−2Qjψσ, the pairing is ⟨Qjψσ,Pjψσ⟩=−iℏσ2∥Qjψσ∥2, so its real part vanishes. By the equality clause of [F5] these properties are exactly the equality case of the position-momentum relation. This is (iv).

Remarks

  • No converse is claimed. The verification shows that the Gaussian family attains the bound and satisfies the equality conditions of The position-momentum preparation relation of the massive spin-s model; it does not claim that every preparation with ΔQjΔPj=ℏ/2 is Gaussian, and no classification of the equality set is recorded here.
  • One family, three coordinates. The computation is uniform in the coordinate j and in the width σ; different widths give different preparations, and the momentum width σp=ℏ/σ is a property of this family in the model, not a measured resolution.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources