Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14
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 new omega one is the old aleph omega

Statement

In the Feferman–Levy model N,

ω1N=ℵomegaV.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Put κ=ℵomegaV=sup⁡n<ωℵnV and regard all ground ordinals as the same ordinals in the transitive symmetric model.

[F1]

Every finite ground aleph is countable in the Feferman–Levy model proves that every ℵnV is countable in N.

[F2]

Hereditarily symmetric names have bounded layer support gives one Hm supporting an HS name.

[F3]

Fixed Boolean values come from initial collapse layers reduces every Hm-fixed Boolean value to conditions restricted below layer m.

[F4]

Forcing theorem supplies the truth lemma relating the interpreted function to conditions in the generic filter.

[F5]

Cofinality cf⁡(α), and regular and singular cardinals fixes the ordinal and aleph conventions used for the limit κ and for the later cofinality consequence.

[F6]

The Axiom of Choice is used only in the ground-model cardinal count of the set of finite initial-layer conditions.

Proof

technique · contradiction for uncountability of the ground limit, followed by leastness of $\omega_1$
1.1F1F5

If α<κ, then α<ℵnV for some n<ω. For α=0 it is finite. Otherwise restrict the surjection from F1 by replacing values outside α with 0; this is a surjection ω↠α in N. Thus every ordinal below κ is countable in N, and consequently κ≤ω1N.

1.2assume-contraF2

Suppose for contradiction that some f∈N is a surjection ω↠κ. Choose an HS name f˙ and use F2 to fix m<ω such that Hm fixes it. For k<ω and α<κ let uk,α=∥f˙(kˇ)=αˇ∥. These Boolean values are fixed by Hm, because f˙ and the check names are fixed.

1.3F6construct

Let P<m={p↾m:p∈P}. For each k<ω put Ak={α<κ:∃q∈P<m (q≤Buk,α)}. Distinct α,β∈Ak require incompatible witnesses, since a condition cannot force two different values of the function at k. Choosing the least witness in a fixed ground well-order injects Ak into P<m. Ground AC and the finite-function calculation give ∣P<m∣V≤ℵmV, hence ∣⋃k<ωAk∣V≤ℵmV<κ.

2.1F3F4step 1.2step 1.3discharge-contradiction

If p⊩f˙(kˇ)=αˇ, then p≤Buk,α, and F3 gives p↾m≤Buk,α; hence α∈Ak. Because the alleged f is surjective, F4 supplies such a k and p∈G for every α<κ. Thus κ=⋃k<ωAk, contradicting the strict bound in step 1.3. Therefore no such f belongs to N, so κ is uncountable in N.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1discharge-contradiction: step 1.2∎

Since ω1N is the least uncountable ordinal of N, step 2.1 gives ω1N≤κ, while step 1.1 gives the reverse inequality. Hence ω1N=κ=ℵomegaV.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources