Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

Radiation Gibbs and perfect linear sound deduction

Statement

Fix aR>0 and the maps of Separate entropy-only radiation state maps. First, their temperature and entropy coordinates are inverse, dεT=T dsT, hT=TsT, and dpT/dεT=1/3 on T>0.

Next, assume countable choice ACω. Let M be a smooth four-manifold without boundary and let g be a smooth symmetric nondegenerate covariant 2-tensor field of signature (−,+,+,+). Write gab for the inverse-metric components and ub:=gbcuc. Use the Levi-Civita connection supplied by Existence and uniqueness of the metric-selected connection of a nondegenerate metric, and its extension to tensor fields. Let c>0, let u be a smooth vector field with gabuaub=−c2, and let T:M→(0,∞) be smooth. Put ε=εT(T), p=pT(T), s=sT(T), and h=ε+p. Define the symmetric tensor field

Tab:=hc2uaub+pgab.

If ∇aTab=0, then ∇a(sua)=0. This is a conditional mathematical identity for the specified tensor and state maps; it assumes no particle-number current.

Finally, on R4 with Minkowski coordinates (x0,x1,x2,x3)=(ct,x) and metric η=diag⁡(−1,1,1,1), specify the linearization as follows. For some ϵ>0, let λ↦(Tλ,uλ) be jointly smooth on (−ϵ,ϵ)×R4, with Tλ(x)>0, T0(x)=T∗, u0=(c,0,0,0), and ηabuλauλb=−c2. Form Tλab by the same stress formula above with (T,u,g) replaced by (Tλ,uλ,η), using ελ:=εT(Tλ) and pλ:=pT(Tλ). Write δf:=ddλfλ∣λ=0; the linearized equation means δ(∂aTλab)=0. Put h∗:=εT(T∗)+pT(T∗), r:=δε, and wi:=δui/c. Its resulting constant-coefficient linear system is

rt+ch∗div⁡w=0,wt+c3h∗∇r=0,

where ∇ and div⁡ are the Euclidean spatial gradient and divergence. With U=(r,w), write this system as Ut+∑j=13Aj∂jU=0, where

Aj:=c(0h∗ejT(1/(3h∗))ej03×3),ej is the jth standard basis vector of R3.

The matrix M∗:=diag⁡(1/(3h∗),h∗I3) is a positive symmetrizer in the explicit sense that it is symmetric positive definite and M∗Aj is symmetric for each j. For each unit spatial vector ν∈R3, define the directional coefficient matrix A(ν):=∑j=13νjAj; its eigenvalues are 0 (multiplicity two) and ±c/3. For Schwartz initial perturbations on R3 or smooth periodic initial perturbations on TL3 with L>0, where Schwartz means each component belongs to S(R3) as defined in Schwartz space and its seminorms, the global smooth evolution, weighted Sobolev contraction, and finite-propagation conclusions are conditional on the exact symmetrized-system interface of Complete symmetrized constant-coefficient evolution stated in [A1]. That current carrier is draft, so this item does not record those conclusions as independently accepted.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: aR>0, T>0, and the smooth fields and tensor equation in the Statement. Assume ACω where indicated; no stronger choice principle is used.

[F1]

Separate entropy-only radiation state maps defines εT=aRT4, pT=εT/3, sT=4aRT3/3, and the candidate entropy-coordinate maps τ(s)=(3s/(4aR))1/3, εs=aRτ4, ps=εs/3.

[F2]

Existence and uniqueness of the metric-selected connection of a nondegenerate metric, and its extension to tensor fields: for a smooth four-manifold without boundary, smooth symmetric nondegenerate metric, and ACω, there is a unique torsion-free metric-compatible connection; its induced tensor derivative obeys the Leibniz and contraction rules and annihilates g and g−1. We use metric compatibility and the Leibniz rule only.

[F3]

Schwartz space and its seminorms: S(R3) is the class of smooth complex-valued functions for which every seminorm sup⁡x∣xα∂βf(x)∣ is finite; real components are viewed as complex-valued functions with zero imaginary part, and the condition is imposed componentwise on vector-valued data.

[A1]

Conditional evolution supplier Complete symmetrized constant-coefficient evolution: assume ACω, m≥1, constant real matrices A1,A2,A3,B,M∈Rm×m, symmetric positive-definite M, symmetric MAj, and positive-semidefinite S:=(MB+BTM)/2. For Ut+∑jAj∂jU+BU=0, the supplier gives a unique global smooth solution for Schwartz initial data on R3 and for smooth periodic data on TL3. With its negative-sign, 2π-normalized Fourier transform U^(ξ):=∫R3e−2πix⋅ξU(x) dx, its Euclidean weighted norms are ∥U∥HMs2:=∫R3(1+∣ξ∣2)sU^(ξ)∗MU^(ξ) dξ for s≥0; they contract for t≥0. On the torus, U^k:=L−3∫[0,L]3U(x)e−2πik⋅x/L dx and ∥U∥HMs(TL3)2:=∑k∈Z3(1+∣k/L∣2)sU^k∗MU^k; these norms contract. For a unit ν∈R3, put A(ν)=∑jνjAj and v∗:=sup⁡∣ν∣=1max⁡{∣λ∣:λ∈spec⁡(M1/2A(ν)M−1/2)}. If v∗>0, R>v∗t, and U0 vanishes on BR(x0), its solution vanishes on BR−v∗t(x0) for 0≤t<R/v∗, with the analogous torus statement using geodesic distance; if v∗=0, each Aj=0. Here m=4, U=(r,w), B=0, and M=M∗. The current supplier carrier and proof are draft; this item uses its interface only conditionally.

[A2]

The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω) defines ACω as a choice function for each countable family of nonempty sets. This is the only choice strength carried here, through [F2] and [A1].

Proof

1.1givenF1algebra

Differentiating the maps in [F1] gives εT′(T)=4aRT3=TsT′(T) and sT′(T)=4aRT2>0. For T>0 and s>0, direct substitution gives τ(sT(T))=T and sT(τ(s))=s, since 3sT(T)/(4aR)=T3 and τ(s)3=3s/(4aR). Hence the explicitly defined εs,ps are the energy and pressure expressed in the entropy coordinate, and dεT=T dsT.

1.2givenF2algebra

Write D:=ua∇a and θ:=∇aua. Metric compatibility and ubub=−c2 give uaub∇aub=12ua∇a(ubub)=0. Expanding the divergence by the Leibniz rule and contracting with ub yields ub∇aTab=ububc2∇a(hua)+hc2uaub∇aub+ua∇ap=−Dh−hθ+Dp=−Dε−hθ. The last pressure term uses ∇agab=0 and ubgab=ua. Thus the assumed tensor equation implies Dε+hθ=0.

2.1givenF1step 1.1algebra

From [F1], hT=εT+pT=43aRT4=TsT, and dpT/dεT=pT′(T)/εT′(T)=1/3. In particular hT>0 for all T>0.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1step 1.2algebra

By step 1.1 and the chain rule, Dε=TDs; by step 2.1, h=Ts. Substitution in step 1.2 gives 0=T(Ds+sθ)=T∇a(sua). Since T>0, division gives ∇a(sua)=0.

3.2givenstep 2.1algebra

By the linearization definition in the Statement, differentiating ηabuλauλb=−c2 at λ=0 gives −2c δu0=0, so δu0=0; also δui=cwi. Since r=δε and step 2.1 gives dpT/dεT=1/3, the state variations satisfy δp=r/3 and δh=r+δp. The first variations of the stress components are therefore δT00=δh−δp=r, δT0i=h∗wi, and δTij=δp δij. Differentiating ∂aTλab=0 at λ=0, with ∂0=c−1∂t, yields the displayed equations for b=0 and b=i.

4.1givenstep 3.2A1A2algebra

Write the system of step 3.2 as Ut+∑jAj∂jU=0 with U=(r,w), Aj=c(0h∗ejT(1/(3h∗))ej03×3), and M∗=diag⁡(1/(3h∗),h∗I3). Because h∗>0, M∗ is positive definite, and M∗Aj=c(013ejT13ej03×3) is symmetric. For a unit ν, A(ν) has the two transverse zero eigenvalues and the longitudinal eigenvalues λ=±c/3, obtained from λ2=c2/3 on the span of (1,0) and (0,ν). The supplier matrix M∗1/2A(ν)M∗−1/2 is similar to A(ν) because M∗ is positive definite, so it has the same spectrum and the supplier speed is v∗=c/3. Thus the exact matrices meet the algebraic hypotheses in [A1] with B=0 and S=0.

5.1A1F3step 3.2step 4.1∎

Conditional on [A1], apply its stated global-evolution and finite-propagation conclusions to the matrices of steps 3.2 and 4.1; the resulting speed is v∗=c/3. The Schwartz data class is the componentwise class in [F3]. The linearization and characteristic calculation in steps 3.2 and 4.1 are unconditional, while these PDE conclusions remain conditional on the current draft supplier interface.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources