Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)
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.

Thermal joins force a common mathematical energy orientation

Statement

Let a family of simple domains satisfy Forward-sector hypotheses for a simple state domain, and suppose every pair has an admitted simple thermal join satisfying T1 and T2 of Thermal joins and conditional contact hypotheses. Then the fixed-work orientation signs from Forward orientation and the Lipschitz boundary graph agree throughout the family. One common affine proof-coordinate convention u′=εu, ε∈{−1,1}, therefore makes each fixed-work accessibility order increase with u′ and preserves the energy-sum formula for joins. This is a mathematical coordinate convention; it does not change a physical energy quantity or assert a sign of a measured temperature.

Facts & Assumptions

[A1]

Forward-sector hypotheses for a simple state domain: the component charts are open, represented states have their positive type weights, and the relation is composition-consistent and transitive.

[A2]

Thermal joins and conditional contact hypotheses: T1 sends every admissible split to its join; T2 supplies, for each join state, at least one admissible split accessible in both directions to that join state, at the same summed energy and work coordinates.

[F1]

Forward orientation and the Lipschitz boundary graph: each component domain has a constant sign εΓ with fixed-work comparison equivalent to εΓ(uy−ux)≥0.

[F2]

Spectator cancellation without comparison completeness: any finite common spectator cancels when the two bases have equal mass; its mass need not equal the base mass.

Proof

Given: [A1], [A2], [F1], and [F2].

1.1A1A2F1construct

Suppose two component signs are opposed. Choose a join state Z and a reversible split (x,y) by T2 in [A2]. Write x=(ux,vx) and y=(uy,vy). Openness in [A1] permits a sufficiently small nonzero δ with x′=(ux+δ,vx) and y′=(uy−δ,vy) in their respective charts. Choose the sign of δ so εΓxδ>0; opposed signs imply εΓy(−δ)>0. Thus [F1] gives x≺≺x′ and y≺≺y′. These pairs have the same summed energy and work coordinates and the same represented aggregate composition and mass.

2.1A1A2F1F2step 1.1∎

If (x′,y′)≺(x,y), consistency with y≺y′ gives (x′,y)≺(x′,y′)≺(x,y). Cancel the common represented spectator y by [F2] to get x′≺x, contrary to step 1.1. But T1 gives (x′,y′)≺Z, and the chosen T2 split gives Z≺(x,y), so transitivity produces exactly this forbidden reverse comparison. Opposed signs are impossible. Every pair has an admitted join, hence one common sign ε works for the whole family. The affine change u′=εu preserves openness and convexity and sends u=ux+uy to u′=εux+εuy; its positive orientation describes the same accessibility relation. No physical energy, unit or calibration premise is redefined.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources