Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
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.

Finite-mode Fock, Gaussian and Bogoliubov foundations — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

The single-mode example derives the pullback sign convention and computes the squeezed vacuum covariance and number expectation. The finite-N warning computes the product mean number and vacuum overlap for repeated identical squeezes. Those finite calculations are not used as an infinite-mode non-implementability proof.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Single-mode squeeze statistics

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice. For one mode with ℏ>0, let Ω be the vacuum and define the unitary dilation on L2(R) by [Usf](x)=e−s/2f(e−sx),s∈R. Then Us∗aUs=cosh⁡(s)a+sinh⁡(s)a∗ on the transported Schwartz core. The squeezed vacuum UsΩ has mean number sinh⁡2(s) and quadrature means zero and variances Var⁡(Q)=ℏ2e2s,Var⁡(P)=ℏ2e−2s. Its covariance determinant is ℏ2/4. The implementer orientation is the pullback convention displayed here; replacing s by −s interchanges the two variances.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice, one finite oscillator mode, ℏ>0, vacuum Ω, and real s.

[A1]

AC supplies the Countable Choice and finite-mode assumptions of the cited suppliers (The Axiom of Choice). The mode count is one, ℏ>0, s∈R, and Us is the dilation displayed in the Example.

[F1]

The Fock–Schrödinger unitary sends Ω to the normalized ground Hermite function g0(x)=π−1/4e−x2/2 and, on the finite Hermite span, identifies a=(Q+iP)/2ℏ, with Q=ℏx and P=−iℏ ∂x (Finite-mode Fock to Schrödinger identification, Finite-mode quadratures and symplectic data).

[F2]

On the finite Hermite span, a∗a=(Q2+P2)/(2ℏ)−I/2, and the vacuum satisfies aΩ=0 (Creation contraction bounds, Finite-mode Fock to Schrödinger identification).

[F3]

The imported 2π-frequency Gaussian transform gives, for A>0 and B∈R, ∫Re−Ax2+iBx dx=πAe−B2/(4A) by setting t=A/π and ξ=−B/(2π); polynomial factors times a positive Gaussian are integrable (Euclidean Gaussian transform with the 2π normalization). Integration by parts on finite intervals is available, and xme−Ax2→0 as ∣x∣→∞ by exponential domination (Complex integration by parts on intervals and decaying lines, The exponential dominates every fixed nonnegative integer power at +∞).

[F4]

If T:U→V is a C1 diffeomorphism between open subsets of R, then Lebesgue substitution applies to every L1 integrand; in particular it applies to T(x)=e−sx and ∣f∣2 (A C^1 diffeomorphism satisfies the change-of-variables formula for L^1 functions).

[F5]

The closed one-mode Fock annihilation and creation operators are the closures of their finite-particle restrictions and are mutual adjoints (Closed adjoint sector domains). Under the unitary in [F1], the closed weighted ladders have domains ∑n≥0n∣cn∣2<∞ and ∑n≥0(n+1)∣cn∣2<∞, respectively, for cn=⟨f,gn⟩. Their actions are af=∑m≥0m+1cm+1gm and a∗f=∑m≥1mcm−1gm, and a∗a=N on D(N)={f:∑n≥0n2∣cn∣2<∞} (Closed ladder domains).

Verification

1.1A1F1F2F3F5algebra

Work in Schrödinger coordinates via [F1], with inner product linear in the first argument. Put bf=(xf+f′)/2 and b†f=(xf−f′)/2 for f∈S(R); both expressions again lie in S. For cn=⟨f,gn⟩, integration by parts gives ⟨bf,gm⟩=⟨f,b†gm⟩=m+1cm+1 and ⟨b†f,gm⟩=mcm−1 for m≥1, with the latter coefficient zero for m=0. The boundary terms vanish since f and each Hermite function are Schwartz. Completeness and Parseval in [F1] give ∑n≥0n∣cn∣2=∥bf∥2<∞ and ∑n≥0(n+1)∣cn∣2=∥b†f∥2<∞. Therefore [F5] identifies the actual closed Fock operators with a=b and a∗=b† on every Schwartz vector, not only on finite Hermite sums. Since bf is Schwartz, f∈D(a∗a)=D(N), and direct differentiation gives a∗af=b†bf=(x2f−f′′−f)/2=((Q2+P2)/(2ℏ)−I/2)f. Thus the ladder, adjoint and number identities needed below all hold on the transported Schwartz domain.

2.1A1F1F4step 1.1algebra

Apply [F4] to the diffeomorphism x↦e−sx and ∣f∣2∈L1: ∫R∣e−s/2f(e−sx)∣2dx=∫R∣f(y)∣2dy, and U−s is its inverse, so Us is unitary. For Schwartz f, direct substitution and the chain rule give Us∗QUsf=esQf,Us∗PUsf=e−sPf. Using a=(Q+iP)/2ℏ and a∗=(Q−iP)/2ℏ, this becomes Us∗aUs=es+e−s2a+es−e−s2a∗=cosh⁡(s)a+sinh⁡(s)a∗. The dilation maps Schwartz space onto itself, so all identities hold on the stated common core and the associated Weyl covariance extends everywhere by unitarity.

3.1F1F3step 2.1algebra

The ground function g0(x)=π−1/4e−x2/2 is even, so its position mean is zero; its derivative is odd, so its momentum mean is zero. By [F3] with A=1,B=0, ∫e−x2dx=π. On [−R,R], the finite-interval integration-by-parts supplier in [F3] gives ∫−RRx2e−x2dx=[−x2e−x2]−RR+12∫−RRe−x2dx. The boundary term tends to zero by [F3], so ∫x2∣g0(x)∣2dx=π−1/2(π/2)=1/2. Also g0′=−xg0 gives both vacuum variances ℏ/2. Moreover ⟨QΩ,PΩ⟩=−iℏ/2, so the real symmetrized cross covariance is zero. For ψs=UsΩ, the unitary conjugation formulas in step 2.1 give ⟨Q⟩ψs=es⟨Q⟩Ω=0,⟨Q2⟩ψs=e2sℏ/2, and likewise ⟨P⟩ψs=0 and ⟨P2⟩ψs=e−2sℏ/2. The cross form is unchanged because the two scale factors multiply to one, so it remains zero. Therefore the covariance determinant is the product of the two variances, ℏ2/4.

4.1step 1.1step 3.1algebra∎

Since Us maps Schwartz space to itself, ψs is in the domain of the number form. By step 1.1 and step 3.1, ⟨a∗a⟩ψs=⟨Q2+P2⟩ψs2ℏ−12=e2s+e−2s−24=sinh⁡2(s). This is the model's finite one-mode number expectation.

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Finite-mode implementability does not supply an infinite-mode limit

Statement refuted

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Fix a positive real action scale ℏ>0, a real squeeze parameter s≠0, and a finite integer N≥1. For a normalized vector in ⋂j=1ND(aj), define its mean total number by the quadratic form nN(ψ):=∑j=1N∥ajψ∥2. Define the one-mode dilation on L2(R) by [Usf](x)=e−s/2f(e−sx). The assertion refuted is that applying this dilation independently to N vacuum modes gives mean total number bounded uniformly over finite N and vacuum overlap bounded away from zero uniformly over those N.

In fact, the resulting finite-mode unitary exists, its mean total number is Nsinh⁡2(s), and the magnitude of its overlap with the N-mode vacuum is ∣⟨ΩN,Us⊗NΩN⟩∣=(cosh⁡s)−N/2⟶0. These exact finite-N calculations exhibit quantities that are not uniform in mode number. They do not prove an infinite-mode non-implementability theorem and do not assign a limiting density operator or measurement.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice, a positive action scale ℏ>0, a nonzero real squeeze parameter s, and a finite integer N≥1.

[A1]

AC supplies the Countable Choice and finite-representation hypotheses of the cited suppliers (The Axiom of Choice). The action scale is positive, ℏ>0, the squeeze is fixed with s∈R∖{0}, and the mode count is a finite integer N≥1.

[F1]

For u=cosh⁡s, v=sinh⁡s, the finite-mode Bogoliubov theorem supplies an implementer on every fixed finite product of N modes (Finite Bogoliubov implementability).

[F2]

The finite-mode Bogoliubov theorem supplies a unitary on every fixed finite number N of modes; it asserts nothing about an infinite collection (Finite Bogoliubov implementability).

[F3]

In Schrödinger coordinates, Q=ℏx, P=−iℏ∂x, and a=(Q+iP)/2ℏ; the vacuum is the normalized ground Hermite function (Finite-mode quadratures and symplectic data, Finite-mode Fock to Schrödinger identification).

[F4]

For A>0 and B∈R, ∫Re−Ax2+iBx dx=πAe−B2/(4A) by scaling the imported 2π-frequency Gaussian transform; finite-interval integration by parts and exponential domination justify the Gaussian second moment (Euclidean Gaussian transform with the 2π normalization, Complex integration by parts on intervals and decaying lines, The exponential dominates every fixed nonnegative integer power at +∞).

[F5]

In every finite dimension n, Lebesgue substitution applies to the C1 dilation x↦e−sx and every L1 integrand; in particular this covers ∣f∣2 in one mode, x2∣Usg0∣2, and the N-coordinate product dilation (A C^1 diffeomorphism satisfies the change-of-variables formula for L^1 functions).

Counterexample

1.1A1F1F2F3F4F5algebra

Apply [F5] to x↦e−sx and ∣f∣2 to get ∫R∣Usf(x)∣2dx=∫R∣f(y)∣2dy, and U−s is its inverse, so Us is unitary. The chain rule for Q=ℏx and P=−iℏ∂x gives Us∗aUs=cosh⁡(s)a+sinh⁡(s)a∗. The scalar pair obeys ∣u∣2−∣v∣2=1 and uv=vu. For the N-mode product take UN=uIN and VN=vIN; the finite Bogoliubov result [F1] supplies an implementer for these coefficients. Write ψs(x)=Usg0(x)=e−s/2π−1/4e−e−2sx2/2. Then aψs=1−e−2s2xψs. By [F4] with A=1,B=0, ∫e−y2dy=π. On [−R,R], integration by parts gives ∫−RRy2e−y2dy=[−y2e−y2]−RR+12∫−RRe−y2dy. The boundary term tends to zero by [F4], so ∫y2∣g0(y)∣2dy=1/2. The substitution y=e−sx in [F5] gives ∫Rx2∣ψs(x)∣2dx=e2s∫Ry2∣g0(y)∣2dy=e2s/2. Consequently ∥aψs∥2=(1−e−2s)22e2s2=sinh⁡2(s). By [F3], the N-mode Fock–Schrödinger unitary sends its vacuum ΩN to g0⊗N. On L2(RN) define [Us(N)f](x1,…,xN)=e−Ns/2f(e−sx1,…,e−sxN). The C1 change-of-variables formula [F5] in RN gives ∥Us(N)f∥2=∥f∥2, so this is unitary. It is the product of the one-mode dilations, and the coordinatewise chain rule gives Us(N)∗ajUs(N)=uaj+vaj∗ for each j. The finite Bogoliubov statement [F1] also supplies an implementer for this coefficient pair. Put ΨN=(UsΩ)⊗N under the same identification; its jth number expectation is the one-mode value ∥aψs∥2=sinh⁡2(s) already computed above. Each factor is a Schwartz Gaussian, so the product is in every D(aj). By the explicitly defined total-number form, the finite sum therefore gives nN(ΨN)=∑j=1N∥ajΨN∥2=Nsinh⁡2(s). The product unitary exists because it is the tensor product of finitely many copies of this unitary. The same coefficient pair is covered by the finite Bogoliubov statement [F2]; no infinite product is taken.

2.1A1F1F2F4step 1.1algebra∎

In Schrödinger coordinates, Ω=g0 and Usg0(x)=e−s/2π−1/4e−e−2sx2/2. Set A=(1+e−2s)/2>0. By [F4] with B=0, ∫Re−Ax2dx=π/A=2π1+e−2s. Hence ⟨g0,Usg0⟩=π−1/2e−s/22π1+e−2s=2es+e−s=1cosh⁡s. Since Us and g0 are real and positive here, this is also the overlap magnitude; the formula holds for every real s. Product inner products factor over the N modes, yielding ∣⟨ΩN,ΨN⟩∣=(cosh⁡s)−N/2. For s≠0, cosh⁡s>1, so this magnitude tends to zero as N→∞. Together with step 1.1 this proves only the stated finite-N divergence and overlap limit. Finite-dimensional implementation does not itself provide an infinite-mode implementer, and this example does not prove that none exists.

Sources