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.
RN curvature invariants and the C2 extension obstruction
Statement
On the dyonic RN datum with real length parameters , let and , . Then the scalar curvature is , while If , the Ricci-square diverges as ; if and , the Kretschmann scalar diverges there. Consequently no nondegenerate metric extension can add an approached point in either case. For the metric is flat and these invariants give no obstruction. No distributional source at is asserted.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The RN datum on a positive-radius open set excluding the roots of .
Causal solutions, Killing horizons, escape and metric extensions clause (e): a nondegenerate extension is an isometric smooth open embedding into a four-manifold with a Lorentz metric of the same signature; an approached added point is a limit . An unbounded polynomial complete curvature contraction along that sequence obstructs the approach.
Dyonic Reissner-Nordström metric and field domains defines and , where is the metric induced by the Euclidean inclusion of the unit sphere.
Tensoriality of the curvature, its coordinate formula and its point-normal metric formula gives and proves that these components define a tensor.
, . For the obstruction claim, take any sequence in the stated RN model domain with and test whether an extension realizes that approach.
Proof
The scalar curvature and both polynomial invariants are the exact identities in [F1]. If , then as ; if and , then .
If , then , and by [F3]. The map is a smooth diffeomorphism onto , with inverse since . As implies , the Euclidean metric pulls back to . Thus . In these Cartesian coordinates the zero connection is torsion-free and metric-compatible, hence is the metric-selected connection; [F4] gives zero curvature, which is the asserted flatness. The invariants vanish by [F1]. This covers the remaining parameter case without inferring flatness from vanishing scalar contractions.
Suppose, for contradiction, that a nondegenerate extension and an added point realize the approach of a sequence from [A1], so . This is exactly the setup in [F2]. By step 1.1 one of the two polynomial complete curvature contractions diverges along that sequence in the corresponding charge case, contradicting the obstruction criterion in [F2]. Hence no such extension realizes the approach. This does not create a point source or assert geodesic incompleteness.
Remarks
The domain excludes . This proposition makes no claim about extensions across a coordinate root, maximality, horizons, or any physical realization.