Alphabeta Math
PropositionStatement: 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.

Rotating mode Gibbs obstruction

Statement

Let N0={0,1,2,…} and let H:=ℓ2(N0,C) be the complex square-summable sequences with inner product ⟨x,y⟩=∑n≥0xnyn‾, linear in its first argument. Let en be the sequence with value 1 at n and 0 elsewhere. Write B(H) for the bounded complex-linear operators on H, with operator norm ∥B∥:=sup⁡∥x∥2≤1∥Bx∥2; for C∈B(H), C∗ is its bounded Hilbert-space adjoint, characterized by ⟨Cx,y⟩=⟨x,C∗y⟩. A state on this operator algebra means a bounded complex-linear functional ω with ω(I)=1 and ω(C∗C)≥0 for every C∈B(H). Define the occupation-number operator D(N):={x∈H:∑n≥0n2∣xn∣2<∞},(Nx)n:=nxn. For a densely defined operator T on this space, use the adjoint relation D(T†):={y∈H:∃z∈H ∀x∈D(T), ⟨Tx,y⟩=⟨x,z⟩},T†y:=z. The representing z is unique when D(T) is dense; here “self-adjoint” means D(T†)=D(T) and T†x=Tx on that domain.

Let ϵ>0 be in joules, m∈Z a dimensionless azimuthal mode number, Ω∈R an angular velocity in s−1, ℏ>0 in joule-seconds, and βK>0 in joules−1. Set H:=ϵN,J:=ℏmN,a:=ϵ−ℏmΩ. For m≠0, J has domain D(N); for m=0, J is the zero operator on all of H. The operator H has energy units J, J has angular-momentum units J s, and a has energy units J, so ΩJ also has units J. Define K0:=H−ΩJ on the common domain D(N) and let K:=K0‾ be its operator closure. For a≠0, K=aN has domain D(N); for a=0, K is the zero operator on all of H. Thus K is the self-adjoint closure of the rotating generator H−ΩJ, including at the zero threshold. Then N, H, J and K are self-adjoint on the stated domains.

Define the one-mode occupation partition sum by ZβK(a):=∑n=0∞e−βKan∈[0,+∞]. It is the diagonal trace of the positive Gibbs weights in the occupation basis whenever the sum is finite. This sum is finite exactly when a=ϵ−ℏmΩ>0, in which case ZβK(a)=11−e−βKa. For a>0, the weights pn=ZβK(a)−1e−βKan sum to one and define the diagonal Gibbs functional ωa(B):=∑n=0∞pn⟨Ben,en⟩,B∈B(H). The proof shows that this is a state in the stated sense. For a≤0, the occupation partition sum diverges, so no normalized Gibbs state of this trace form exists. This is a single bosonic mode calculation; it constructs no continuum field state or rotating-spacetime equilibrium.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The square-summable sequence space, its standard coordinate vectors, the real parameters and units in the Statement, and the displayed maximal diagonal domains.

[F1]

Square-summable families on an arbitrary index set and the space ℓ2(I): ℓ2(I,C) consists of complex families for which the supremum of finite subsums ∑i∈F∣xi∣2 is finite; its norm is that square root and its pairing ∑ixiyi‾ is linear in the first argument. The definition gives an inner-product space but does not assert completeness.

[F2]

Cauchy–Schwarz: ∣⟨x,y⟩∣≤∥x∥ ∥y∥, with equality exactly for dependent pairs: the inner product obeys ∣⟨x,y⟩∣≤∥x∥∥y∥, so the coordinate pairings and adjoint pairings used below converge.

[F3]

Completeness of countable square-summable sequences: the displayed ℓ2(N0,C) sequence space with its stated inner product is complete and therefore is a Hilbert space.

Proof

1.1givenF1F2F3algebra

By [F3], H with the displayed inner product is complete, so it is a Hilbert space. For x∈H, put S:=∑n≥0∣xn∣2=∥x∥22 and SM:=∑n=0M∣xn∣2. Every finite subset of N0 is contained in some {0,…,M}, so SM↑S. The finite-subsum splitting identity in [F1], applied to {0,…,M}, gives ∥x−∑n=0Mxnen∥22=∑n>M∣xn∣2=S−SM→0. Thus finite-support sequences are dense and lie in D(N), so N is densely defined. For x,y∈D(N), Cauchy–Schwarz [F2] gives convergence of both inner-product sums and ⟨Nx,y⟩=∑nnxnyn‾=∑nxnnyn‾=⟨x,Ny⟩, so the operator is symmetric.

1.2givenalgebra

On the basis vector en, the Gibbs weight for K is e−βKan, so the partition sum is the displayed nonnegative series. If a>0, put r=e−βKa∈(0,1); its partial sums are (1−rM+1)/(1−r) and tend to (1−r)−1. If a=0, every term is 1 and the partial sums tend to +∞. If a<0, the terms eβK∣a∣n do not tend to zero, so the nonnegative series diverges.

2.1givenF1step 1.1algebra

If y∈D(N), then z:=Ny∈H, and step 1.1 shows ⟨Nx,y⟩=⟨x,z⟩ for every x∈D(N); thus y∈D(N†) and N†y=Ny. Conversely, if y∈D(N†) with representing vector z∈H, test the defining identity on each x=en to obtain zn=nyn. Since z is square-summable, ∑nn2∣yn∣2<∞, so y∈D(N) and z=Ny. Therefore D(N†)=D(N) and N†=N.

3.1givenstep 1.1step 2.1algebra

Multiplication by a real nonzero scalar c leaves the adjoint domain D(N) unchanged and multiplies the adjoint action by c: the same coordinate test as step 2.1 forces zn=cnyn, and (cnyn)n is square-summable exactly when (nyn)n is. Thus cN is self-adjoint on D(N). The zero operator on all of H is self-adjoint: its adjoint relation forces ⟨x,z⟩=0 for every x∈H, in particular x=z, so z=0. Taking c=ϵ and c=ℏm when m≠0 proves the assertions for H and J; when m=0, J=0 on all of H. On the common domain, K0=aN. If a≠0, this operator is self-adjoint and closed by the scalar argument, so its closure is itself. If a=0, K0 is zero on the dense finite-support domain D(N); its graph closure is H×{0} and hence K is zero on all of H, which is self-adjoint.

4.1givenF1F2step 1.2algebra∎

In the finite case a>0, pn=(1−r)rn are positive and sum to one. For each B∈B(H), Cauchy–Schwarz [F2] and the operator norm give ∣⟨Ben,en⟩∣≤∥Ben∥2∥en∥2≤∥B∥, hence ∑npn∣⟨Ben,en⟩∣≤∥B∥; the defining series for ωa(B) is absolutely convergent and ∣ωa(B)∣≤∥B∥. Absolute convergence gives complex linearity, and ωa(I)=∑npn=1. For every C∈B(H), ωa(C∗C)=∑npn⟨C∗Cen,en⟩=∑npn∥Cen∥22≥0. Thus ωa is a bounded positive normalized linear functional, hence a state. If a≤0, step 1.2 gives no finite normalizer for these same occupation weights. This proves exactly the asserted trace-Gibbs obstruction without any field-theoretic or spacetime extension.

Remarks

The source treatments motivate finite Gibbs weighting and KMS equilibrium. The positivity threshold, weighted domain, self-adjointness and geometric-series calculation above are proved directly for this one-mode model; no rotating-field or black-hole conclusion is imported.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources