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.

Clifford traces and normalized spin completeness — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

These worked calculations specialize the A-page formal coefficients to the massless annihilation limit, massless scalar phase space, and the spin term in a uniform magnetic field. They verify angular and unit factors without introducing observations, exact interacting evolution, lifetime laws, higher-order QED corrections, or a full magnetic spectrum. The annihilation example remains conditional on its missing QFT-MG03 formal Ward input.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

Massless formal annihilation angular contrast

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Use the conditional assumptions and conventions of Full-mass unpolarized formal pair-production coefficient, including its formal tree coefficient, positive-shell inputs, center-of-momentum angle, and Countable Choice premise. Set m=M=0 and s>0: write pi=(Ei,pi) and ki=(εi,ki) with Ei=∣pi∣>0 and εi=∣ki∣>0, and retain p1+p2=k1+k2=P with h(P,P)=s.

[F1]

Full-mass unpolarized formal pair-production coefficient: the exact differential and total formal coefficients as functions of βe,βμ,θ,s.

Example

For this massless specialization, compare the formal differential coefficient at θ=0 and at θ=π/2. This is a coefficient calculation, not an observed event ratio or an exact continuum-QED cross section.

Verification

1.1givenF1algebra

Setting βe=βμ=1 in [F1] gives dσcoeff/dΩ=α2(ℏc)2(1+cos⁡2θ)/(4s). At θ=0 this is α2(ℏc)2/(2s); at θ=π/2 it is α2(ℏc)2/(4s), so the ratio is 2.

2.1step 1.1F1algebra∎

Integrating the same density over the sphere uses ∫dΩ=4π and ∫cos⁡2θ dΩ=4π/3, giving σcoeff=4πα2(ℏc)2/(3s), in agreement with [F1]. No count data or continuum scattering operator is introduced.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

Two-body symmetry factors and massless daughter rate units

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume Countable Choice ACω The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω). Use the formal scalar coefficient conventions of Scalar symmetry factors and decay coefficient units and Complete two-body phase space and coefficient flux map. Set the equal scalar rest energy to m=0 and take s>0. For scattering, write pi=(Ei,pi) and ki=(εi,ki) with Ei=∣pi∣>0 and εi=∣ki∣>0, and require P=p1+p2=k1+k2 and h(P,P)=s, evaluating the scattering coefficients in the center-of-momentum frame of Complete two-body phase space and coefficient flux map. For decay, take both daughters on that same positive shell with total parent P0=(M0,0), M0>0. Let the constant quartic amplitude λ∈R and cubic parent amplitude GE∈C have the units specified by those suppliers.

[A1]

Countable Choice ACω The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω) is assumed; no stronger choice axiom is used.

[F1]

Scalar symmetry factors and decay coefficient units: identical and distinguishable scalar scattering coefficients and the equal-daughter decay-rate coefficient.

[F2]

Complete two-body phase space and coefficient flux map: the phase-space integral and the units and definitions of the formal coefficient maps.

Example

Assume Countable Choice, ACω The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω), as required by the phase-space and coefficient-map suppliers used below.

The massless special case makes the identical-final-state factor and the rate-coefficient units explicit without adding an exponential lifetime assumption.

Verification

1.1givenA1F1algebra

Under [A1], the scalar and phase-space suppliers apply. Setting m=0 in [F1] gives the identical-final total scattering coefficient λ2(ℏc)2/(32πs); the distinguishable coefficient is twice this value. The two differential coefficients have the corresponding 1/(128π2s) and 1/(64π2s) factors.

2.1step 1.1F1F2algebra∎

Setting the daughter rest energy to zero in [F1] gives Γcoeff=∣GE∣2/(32πℏM0). Since GE and M0 are in joules and ℏ is in joule-seconds, the units reduce to s−1. This coefficient does not determine a survival-time law.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

Formal Dirac spin coefficient in a uniform field

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Use the formal spin term and magnetic-moment convention of Minimal Dirac magnetic square and formal Pauli benchmark. Let m>0 be its mass in kilograms, q=−e with e>0 in coulombs, and define A:R3→R3 by A(x)=12B0e3×x, where B0>0 is in tesla; this is smooth with tesla-metre components and its curl is the constant field B=∇×A:R3→R3, B(x)=B0e3, where e3=(0,0,1). Use χ+=(1,0)T and χ−=(0,1)T in C2, which satisfy σ3χ±=±χ± for the matrix in the supplier.

[F1]

Minimal Dirac magnetic square and formal Pauli benchmark: the formal magnetic term is −(q/m)S⋅B with S=ℏΣ/2 and the minimal coefficient convention has gs=2.

Example

The two spin eigenvalues give opposite formal energy coefficients in the same uniform field. For comparison only, define the formal frequency coefficient νcomp:=eB0/(2πm), whose SI unit is C T kg−1=s−1, equivalently the formal angular-frequency coefficient ωcomp:=2πνcomp=eB0/m. This is a formal comparison only, not a trajectory law or empirical prediction.

Verification

1.1givenF1algebra

With q=−e, the supplier's term is (e/m)S3B0. Since σ3 has eigenvalues ±1, S3 has eigenvalues ±ℏ/2, so the two coefficients are ±eℏB0/(2m)=±μBB0, where μB=eℏ/(2m). Their gap is eℏB0/m.

2.1step 1.1F1algebra∎

Dividing that formal energy gap by ℏ gives the angular-frequency coefficient ωs=eB0/m in rad s−1. The cyclic-frequency coefficient is νs:=ωs/(2π)=eB0/(2πm) in hertz, so νs=νcomp and ωs=ωcomp. This compares formal coefficients only; it is not a full Landau-spectrum result or an empirical prediction.

Sources