Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passverified 2026-08-03 (gpt-5.6-sol-codex-subscription)
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 integers form a totally ordered ring

Statement

The relation of Order on the integers is well defined and is a total order on Z; it is compatible with addition (x≤y implies x+z≤y+z) and positives are closed under multiplication (0<x and 0<y imply 0<xy). Thus Z is a totally ordered commutative ring.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Integers x=[(a,b)], y=[(c,d)], z=[(e,f)] with the operations of Arithmetic on the integers.

[L1]

Addition on N is commutative and associative (Addition is commutative, Addition is associative).

[L2]

The order on N is total, antisymmetric, and transitive (≤ is a linear order on N).

[L3]

Natural order is translation-invariant: x≤y  ⟺  x+z≤y+z (Order is compatible with addition).

[L4]

By the definition of natural order, x≤y exactly when y=x+k for some natural k; if x<y, such a gap is nonzero (Order on the natural numbers).

[L5]

Natural multiplication is commutative and associative, distributes over addition, and has the usual zero and identity laws; multiplication by a nonzero natural preserves strict order (Multiplication is commutative, Multiplication is associative, Distributivity and the successor law for multiplication, Zero and one under multiplication, Order is compatible with multiplication).

[L6]

The integer operations make Z a commutative ring with multiplicative identity (The integers form a commutative ring).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Suppose (a,b)∼(a′,b′) and (c,d)∼(c′,d′), i.e. a+b′=b+a′ and c+d′=d+c′.

1.2given

Suppose a+d≤b+c.

1.3L2

Totality: in N either a+d≤b+c or b+c≤a+d, so x≤y or y≤x.

1.4L2

Antisymmetry: x≤y and y≤x give a+d≤b+c and b+c≤a+d, hence a+d=b+c, which is x=y as classes.

1.5L1L2L3

Transitivity: from a+d≤b+c and c+f≤d+e, adding gives (a+d)+(c+f)≤(b+c)+(d+e); regrouping, (a+f)+(c+d)≤(b+e)+(c+d); cancelling, a+f≤b+e, i.e. x≤z.

1.6L1L3

Compatibility with addition: x+z≤y+z reads (a+e)+(d+f)≤(b+f)+(c+e), which regroups to (a+d)+(e+f)≤(b+c)+(e+f), equivalent to a+d≤b+c, i.e. x≤y.

1.7given

Suppose 0<x and 0<y, i.e. b<a and d<c.

2.1step 1.2L3

Adding (a′+d′): (a+d)+(a′+d′)≤(b+c)+(a′+d′).

2.2step 1.1L1

Regrouping with the equations of step 1.1: (b+c)+(a′+d′)=(b+a′)+(c+d′)=(a+b′)+(d+c′)=(a+d)+(b′+c′).

2.3step 1.7L4

Write a=b+k and c=d+m with nonzero naturals k,m.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2L3

So (a+d)+(a′+d′)≤(a+d)+(b′+c′); cancelling (a+d) gives a′+d′≤b′+c′. Applying the same argument with primed and unprimed representatives exchanged proves the converse implication, so the relation is independent of representatives.

3.2step 2.3L1L5

Expanding both components of xy=[(ac+bd, ad+bc)]: ac+bd=(b+k)(d+m)+bd=(bd+bm+kd+bd)+km and ad+bc=(b+k)d+b(d+m)=bd+kd+bd+bm, so ac+bd=(ad+bc)+km.

4.1step 2.3step 3.2L2L4L5

Since k,m are nonzero, 0<k and 0<m by [L4]. Hence [L5] gives 0=0⋅m<km, and step 3.2 yields ad+bc<ac+bd, which is 0<xy.

5.1step 3.1step 1.3step 1.4step 1.5step 1.6step 4.1L6∎

The order is well defined, total, compatible with addition, and positives are closed under multiplication; together with [L6], this makes Z a totally ordered commutative ring.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources