Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

Unitary deficiency parameterization at a reference scale

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice and Countable Choice. Let H be a complex Hilbert space and S:D(S)→H a densely defined, closed, symmetric linear operator. Fix E∗>0 and let N±=N±(S;E∗) and n±=dim⁡N± be the scaled deficiency spaces and indices. For every unitary map V:N+→N−, the operator D(SV)=D(S)⊕{u+Vu:u∈N+},SV(f+u+Vu)=Sf+iE∗u−iE∗Vu is a self-adjoint extension of S. Every self-adjoint extension of S is uniquely SV for one such V. Consequently S has a self-adjoint extension if and only if n+=n−.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Hilbert space, closed symmetric operator, reference scale, deficiency spaces, and indices in the Statement. All inner products are linear in the first argument.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice is the choice-function principle, and Countable Choice is its countable-family restriction (The Axiom of Choice, The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

[F1]

At scale E∗, N±=ker⁡(S∗∓iE∗I) and n±=dim⁡N±; these are closed Hilbert subspaces, and Hilbert dimension is the cardinality of an orthonormal basis Closed symmetric operators and deficiency data Deficiency subspaces and deficiency indices.

[F2]

For a densely defined operator A, ran⁡(A−z)⊥=ker⁡(A∗−z‾I); its adjoint is closed and reverses densely defined operator inclusion The adjoint is well defined, closed, and reverses inclusions.

[F3]

Every closed linear subspace of a Hilbert space has an orthogonal complement and gives the unique decomposition into that subspace and its orthogonal complement Orthogonal decomposition by a closed subspace.

[F4]

The graph norm of a closed operator is complete; on D(A) it is ∥f∥A2=∥f∥2+∥Af∥2 Unbounded linear operators: domain, graph and extension.

[F5]

For a self-adjoint operator, its Cayley transform CR=(R−iI)(R+iI)−1 is unitary; the Cayley map is one-to-one and its inverse sends a unitary W with ker⁡(I−W)={0} to a self-adjoint operator on ran⁡(I−W) (Cayley transform of a self-adjoint operator, Cayley correspondence between self-adjoint operators and unitaries).

[F6]

Equal Hilbert dimensions mean that orthonormal bases of the two spaces have bijective index sets; under Choice each such Hilbert space has an orthonormal basis and the dimension is independent of that basis Deficiency subspaces and deficiency indices, Injection, surjection, bijection.

[F7]

The adjoint is characterized by ⟨Af,g⟩=⟨f,A∗g⟩ for every f∈D(A) and g∈D(A∗) Adjoint of a densely defined operator.

Proof

Given: The objects in the Statement. Put A=E∗−1S on D(A)=D(S).

1.1F1F7algebra

The graph of A is the image of the graph of S under the bounded invertible map (f,g)↦(f,E∗−1g) on H⊕H, so it is closed; real scaling preserves symmetry. If g∈D(S∗), then for every f∈D(S), ⟨Af,g⟩=E∗−1⟨Sf,g⟩=⟨f,E∗−1S∗g⟩, so g∈D(A∗) and A∗g=E∗−1S∗g. Conversely, if g∈D(A∗), then ⟨Sf,g⟩=E∗⟨Af,g⟩=⟨f,E∗A∗g⟩, so g∈D(S∗) and S∗g=E∗A∗g. Therefore D(A∗)=D(S∗) and A∗=E∗−1S∗. Since A∗∓iI=E∗−1(S∗∓iE∗I), the ordinary deficiency spaces of A at ±i are exactly N±.

1.2A1F6construct

Suppose n+=n−. Choose orthonormal bases (ej)j∈J+ of N+ and (fj)j∈J− of N−. By [F6], choose a bijection π:J+→J−. The map V0ej=fπ(j) preserves norms on finite linear combinations by orthonormality, so it extends continuously to an isometry V:N+→N−. Its range contains the finite span of the fj, which is dense; the range of an isometry from the complete space N+ is closed, so V is onto and unitary.

2.1step 1.1F2F3

For f∈D(A), symmetry makes ⟨Af,f⟩ real; expanding the two norms gives ∥(A±iI)f∥2=∥Af∥2+∥f∥2. Thus A±iI are injective. If (A±iI)fk converges, the norm identity applied to differences makes (fk) Cauchy and then (Afk) Cauchy; closedness of A shows the limit is in the range. Hence M±:=ran⁡(A±iI) are closed. By [F2] and [F3], H=M+⊕N+=M−⊕N−, with orthogonal sums.

2.2step 1.1F2F3F4F7

Equip D(A∗) with the graph inner product ⟨f,g⟩A∗=⟨f,g⟩+⟨A∗f,A∗g⟩. It is complete by [F2, F4], and D(A) is a closed subspace because A is closed and A∗f=Af there. If z∈D(A∗) is graph-orthogonal to D(A), then for every f∈D(A), ⟨Af,A∗z⟩=−⟨f,z⟩. By the adjoint definition, this means A∗z∈D(A∗) and A∗2z=−z. Therefore z+=(z−iA∗z)/2 and z−=(z+iA∗z)/2 satisfy A∗z+=iz+ and A∗z−=−iz−, and z=z++z−. Conversely, D(A) is graph-orthogonal to both kernels: for u∈N+, ⟨f,u⟩+⟨Af,A∗u⟩=⟨f,u⟩+⟨Af,iu⟩=0 by the adjoint identity and conjugate-linearity in the second argument, and the same computation with A∗u=−iu holds for u∈N−. If u∈N+ and v∈N−, then ⟨u,v⟩+⟨A∗u,A∗v⟩=⟨u,v⟩+⟨iu,−iv⟩=0. Thus the two kernels are graph-orthogonal to each other. Applying [F3] in the graph Hilbert space proves the orthogonal decomposition D(A∗)=D(A)⊕N+⊕N−.

3.1F2F3F5step 2.1

Define CA:M+→M− by CA((A+iI)f)=(A−iI)f. Injectivity of A+iI makes this well defined, the norm identity in step 2.1 makes it an isometry, and it is onto M−. Define W(m+u)=CAm−Vu for m∈M+ and u∈N+. The decompositions from step 2.1 make W well defined; it is unitary because its two orthogonal summands are mapped isometrically onto M− and N−. For f∈D(A), (I−W)(A+iI)f=2if, so ran⁡(I−W) is dense. If Wz=z, then z is orthogonal to ran⁡(I−W) by unitarity, hence to the dense domain D(A), so z=0. The Cayley correspondence [F5] therefore gives a self-adjoint operator AV with Cayley transform W.

4.1F5step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1algebra

For m=(A+iI)f and u∈N+, direct calculation gives (I−W)(m+u)=2if+u+Vu and i(I+W)(m+u)=2iAf+iu−iVu. The Cayley inverse is AV=i(I+W)(I−W)−1 on ran⁡(I−W), so D(AV)=ran⁡(I−W)=D(A)+{u+Vu:u∈N+} and AV(2if+u+Vu)=2iAf+iu−iVu. Equivalently, after renaming 2if as f, AV(f+u+Vu)=Af+iu−iVu. The sum is direct: if f=u+Vu∈D(A), then (I−W)(A+iI)f=2if=(I−W)(2iu); injectivity of I−W gives (A+iI)f=2iu. Its left side lies in M+ and its right side in N+, whose intersection is zero, so u=f=0. Multiplication by E∗ gives the displayed domain and action for SV=E∗AV. The two-way scalar-adjoint calculation in step 1.1 applies to AV as well, so SV∗=E∗AV∗=SV. Thus SV is a self-adjoint extension of S.

4.2F2F5step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1

Conversely, let T be any self-adjoint extension of S and put R=E∗−1T. The two-way scalar-adjoint calculation in step 1.1 gives R∗=E∗−1T∗=R, so R is a self-adjoint extension of A. Its Cayley transform CR is unitary by [F5] and agrees with CA on M+, since R equals A on D(A). A unitary carrying M+ onto M− carries their orthogonal complements N+ onto N− by step 2.1 and [F2]; hence CR(N+)=N−. Put V=−CR∣N+; this is unitary. The unitary W constructed from this V agrees with CR on both orthogonal summands of H, so uniqueness in [F5] gives R=AV. This determines V uniquely from T and proves that every self-adjoint extension of S is uniquely SV.

5.1A1F6step 1.2step 4.1step 4.2∎

If n+=n−, step 1.2 supplies a unitary and step 4.1 supplies a self-adjoint extension. If an extension exists, step 4.2 supplies a unitary N+→N−, so its orthonormal bases have bijective index sets and n+=n−. This proves the existence equivalence and the complete parameterization.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources