Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adapted
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.

Laws of finite sums and finite products

Statement

Let a,b,c:N→R be sequences of reals, let λ∈R, and let m,n∈N, with finite sums and finite products as in Finite sums and finite products, by recursion. Then:

  1. Additivity. ∑k<n(ak+bk)=∑k<nak+∑k<nbk.
  2. Scaling. ∑k<nλak=λ∑k<nak; in particular ∑k<nλ=nλ, where n denotes the canonical field image n⋅1R of the natural n (The unique embedding of ℚ into an ordered field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
  3. Splitting. If m≤n then ∑k<nak=∑k<mak+∑k=mn−1ak, and ∏k<nak=(∏k<mak)(∏k=mn−1ak).
  4. Monotonicity. If ak≤bk for all k<n then ∑k<nak≤∑k<nbk. In particular, if ak≥0 for all k<n then ∑k<nak≥0, every single term satisfies aj≤∑k<nak for j<n, and ∑k<nak=0 forces ak=0 for every k<n.
  5. Telescoping. ∑k<n(ck+1−ck)=cn−c0.
  6. Products. ∏k<n(akbk)=(∏k<nak)(∏k<nbk); if ak≥0 for all k<n then ∏k<nak≥0, and if ak>0 for all k<n then ∏k<nak>0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Sequences a,b,c:N→R, a real λ, and naturals m,n. Write Σn=∑k<nak and Πn=∏k<nak.

[L1]

Recursion clauses (Finite sums and finite products, by recursion): ∑k<0ak=0 and ∑k<n+1ak=∑k<nak+an; ∏k<0ak=1 and ∏k<n+1ak=(∏k<nak)⋅an; and for m≤n, ∑k=mn−1ak=∑j<dam+j and likewise for products, where d is the unique natural with m+d=n. If m=n, then d=0, including m=n=0 with the stipulated −1 endpoint label.

[L2]

Field axioms: addition and multiplication are associative and commutative, 0 and 1 are the identities, x−x=0, and multiplication distributes over addition (Field, Ordered field); and 0⋅x=0, which is not an axiom but a lemma (Multiplication by zero: 0⋅a=0).

[L3]

Induction principle: a property holding at 0 and inherited by successors holds at every natural (The principle of mathematical induction).

[L4]

Adding inequalities: x≤y and u≤v imply x+u≤y+v. Order is preserved by adding a constant and by adding inequalities states the STRICT forms and only those (x<y⇒x+c<y+c, and x<y with u<v giving x+u<y+v); the nonstrict form used throughout below is those two together with the cases x=y and u=v, which are settled by trichotomy, the order being total and transitive (Ordered field).

[L5]

The canonical embedding ι:Q→R is a field homomorphism; writing naturals for their field images gives 0R=0⋅1R, (n+1)⋅1R=n⋅1R+1R, and n⋅1R>0 for natural n≥1 (The unique embedding of ℚ into an ordered field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).

[L6]

Sign rules: a product of two positives is positive (Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication, claim 1), and a product of two nonnegatives is nonnegative, since a factor equal to 0 makes the product 0 (Multiplication by zero: 0⋅a=0) and otherwise both factors are positive; and 1>0, which is proved in The multiplicative identity is positive and stated by none of the items named above.

[L7]

Natural order means m≤n if and only if m+d=n for some natural d (Order on the natural numbers). Such d is unique: commutativity (Addition is commutative) turns m+d=m+e into d+m=e+m, and cancellation (Addition is cancellative) gives d=e. Natural addition satisfies m+0=m and m+(d+1)=(m+d)+1 (Addition of natural numbers).

Proof

technique · induction
1.1baseL1L2L5L6

Base case n=0: every claim holds at n=0, since both sides of claim 1 are 0=0+0, both sides of claim 2 are 0=λ⋅0 and 0=0λ, claim 4 reads 0≤0 with no term to bound and the hypothesis ∑k<0ak=0 giving nothing to prove, claim 5 reads 0=c0−c0, and claim 6 reads 1=1⋅1 with 1>0.

1.2ih

Inductive hypothesis: fix n∈N and assume claims 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 hold for this n and for all sequences a,b,c and all λ.

1.3L1L2L3L7

Splitting, claim 3: fix m and prove for every natural d the identities ∑k<m+dak=∑k<mak+∑j<dam+j and ∏k<m+dak=(∏k<mak)(∏j<dam+j). For d=0, [L7] gives m+0=m and [L1, L2] give addition of 0 and multiplication by 1. If the two identities hold for d, then m+(d+1)=(m+d)+1 by [L7]; recursion and associativity give ∑k<m+(d+1)ak=∑k<m+dak+am+d=∑k<mak+(∑j<dam+j+am+d)=∑k<mak+∑j<d+1am+j. Likewise, ∏k<m+(d+1)ak=(∏k<m+dak)am+d=(∏k<mak)((∏j<dam+j)am+d)=(∏k<mak)(∏j<d+1am+j). Thus [L3] proves both identities for every d. Given the stated m≤n, choose the unique d with m+d=n by [L7]; substituting n=m+d and using the lower-index notation in [L1] proves claim 3, including m=n and m=n=0.

2.1step 1.2L1L2

Additivity at n+1: ∑k<n+1(ak+bk)=∑k<n(ak+bk)+(an+bn)=(∑k<nak+∑k<nbk)+(an+bn)=(∑k<nak+an)+(∑k<nbk+bn)=∑k<n+1ak+∑k<n+1bk, using the recursion clause, the hypothesis, and commutativity with associativity of addition.

2.2step 1.2L1L2L5

Scaling at n+1: ∑k<n+1λak=∑k<nλak+λan=λ∑k<nak+λan=λ(∑k<nak+an)=λ∑k<n+1ak by the recursion clause, the hypothesis and distributivity; taking ak=1 for all k gives ∑k<n+1λ=∑k<nλ+λ=nλ+λ=(n+1)λ.

2.3step 1.2L1L4

Monotonicity at n+1: assume ak≤bk for all k<n+1; then ak≤bk for all k<n, so the hypothesis gives ∑k<nak≤∑k<nbk, and adding the inequality an≤bn gives ∑k<n+1ak=∑k<nak+an≤∑k<nbk+bn=∑k<n+1bk.

2.4step 1.2L1L2

Telescoping at n+1: ∑k<n+1(ck+1−ck)=∑k<n(ck+1−ck)+(cn+1−cn)=(cn−c0)+(cn+1−cn)=cn+1−c0, by the recursion clause, the hypothesis and the field identities.

2.5step 1.2L1L2L6

Products at n+1: ∏k<n+1(akbk)=(∏k<n(akbk))(anbn)=(∏k<nak)(∏k<nbk)(anbn)=(∏k<n+1ak)(∏k<n+1bk) by the recursion clause, the hypothesis, and commutativity with associativity of multiplication; and if every ak≥0 for k<n+1 then ∏k<n+1ak=(∏k<nak)an is a product of two nonnegatives, hence nonnegative, with the same argument giving positivity from positivity since ∏k<0ak=1>0.

3.1step 1.1step 2.3step 1.3L3L4L2

Consequences of monotonicity, completing claim 4: monotonicity itself holds at every n, by the induction principle applied to the base case of step 1.1 and the successor step 2.3, so it is available for an arbitrary n in what follows; if ak≥0 for all k<n then comparing with the zero sequence gives ∑k<nak≥∑k<n0=0; for j<n splitting at j and then at j+1 writes ∑k<nak=∑k<jak+aj+∑k=j+1n−1ak with the first and third summands ≥0, so aj≤∑k<nak; and if moreover ∑k<nak=0 then 0≤aj≤0 for every j<n, so aj=0.

4.1step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2step 2.3step 2.4step 2.5step 1.3step 3.1L3discharge-induction∎

By the induction principle claims 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 hold for every n∈N, and claim 3 was proved in step 1.3 with its consequences in step 3.1, so all six laws hold.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources