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 three-dimensional free Schrödinger operator as the weak Laplacian on its Sobolev domain
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice and the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice (), The Axiom of Choice). Let , put , and let be the free operator of Real multiplication operators and free plus bounded-potential Schrödinger operators clause (b) with , this and : where is the unitary Plancherel transform of that theorem. Let denote the second weak partial derivative in the -th coordinate, defined componentwise on the locally integrable classes of (Weak derivative of a locally integrable function), write for the weak Laplacian (defined on the classes whose three second weak partial derivatives lie in ), and let be the Sobolev space (Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms). Then:
(a) as sets and equivalently, and for almost every , and the two classes agree.
(b) For every real bounded measurable , the operator of clause (c) of the cited theorem, with domain , coincides with the operator on the same domain; in particular, for and the eigenvalue equation is equivalent to the weak equation elementwise in .
The statement identifies operators on the same domain; it asserts neither smoothness of the classes in nor any physical interpretation.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: ; ; the operator of the cited theorem with , this and ; the weak partial derivatives , the second weak partial derivatives and the weak Laplacian ; the Sobolev space ; a real bounded measurable .
Fourier multipliers of weak derivatives. If with for a multi-index , then for almost every ; in the second derivative in the -th coordinate has multiplier , so is the class with , and, when all three second weak partials lie in , for almost every (Distributional derivatives are polynomial Fourier multipliers). The weak partial derivatives are the corresponding distributional derivatives of the regular distributions of these classes (Weak derivative of a locally integrable function).
The free operator. is self-adjoint, coincides with as a set with equivalent norms, for every , and in the quadratic-form sense (Real multiplication operators and free plus bounded-potential Schrödinger operators clauses (b), (c)).
Sobolev weight characterisation. For one has if and only if , equivalently if and only if and ; the bracket-weighted norm is equivalent to the weak-derivative norm (Integer-order W^{k,2} and H^k agree with equivalent norms clause 2, Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms).
Plancherel is injective. The Plancherel transform is a surjective linear isometry of ; in particular implies (Plancherel theorem).
Bounded perturbation. For real, bounded and measurable, is the bounded multiplication operator of clause (a) of the cited theorem and is self-adjoint on (Real multiplication operators and free plus bounded-potential Schrödinger operators clauses (a), (c)).
Proof
Given: The data of the statement and [F1]-[F5].
[Domain and regularity] By [F2] the sets and coincide. For , [F3] gives and , so each lies in and, by [F1], each second weak partial derivative lies in with that transform; hence is defined and its Plancherel transform is the sum almost everywhere. This proves the domain identity of (a) and defines the left-hand side of the multiplier comparison.
[Multiplier comparison] Fix . By [F2], for almost every . Let ; by step 1.1 and [F1], for almost every . Hence in and [F4] gives . This proves (a).
[Bounded perturbations] Let be real, bounded and measurable and let . By step 1.1, , so , and because is bounded; moreover, by [F5] and step 2.1, on the common domain of clause (c) of the cited theorem. Since the two operators have the same domain and the same values, they coincide; in particular the eigenvalue equation and the weak equation are the same elementwise identity in . This proves (b).
Remarks
- Why the factor . With the Plancherel convention the weak Laplacian has multiplier , so has multiplier : the constant of the cited theorem is fixed by this convention and is not a convention-free physical statement.
- Scope. The lemma compares two mathematical operators on . It asserts no smoothness of classes, no boundary values, no self-adjointness beyond that of the cited theorem, and no identification of with any measured Hamiltonian.
Depends on
Real multiplication operators and free plus bounded-potential Schrödinger operators
Distributional derivatives are polynomial Fourier multipliers
Integer-order W^{k,2} and H^k agree with equivalent norms
Plancherel theorem
Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms
Weak derivative of a locally integrable function
The Axiom of Countable Choice ()
The Axiom of Choice
Dependency tree · 2 levels
Sources
- G. Teschl, Mathematical Methods in Quantum Mechanics, 1st edition 2009, Theorem 7.8, printed page 168 (the free Schrödinger operator and its domain), and Section 10.1, printed pages 221-222 (the weak Laplacian of the hydrogen Hamiltonian)
- D. Tong, Quantum Mechanics (author-hosted lecture set), Section 4.2, printed pages 104-105 (the three-dimensional Schrödinger equation with a central potential and its spherical Laplacian)