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.

Current continuity, Drude obstructions and conditional diffusion — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

A conserved finite current obstructs an integrable dc correlation

Statement refuted

Every finite thermal lattice current correlation CL(t) defined by the current convention in this page is absolutely integrable on [0,∞), so its unregulated Green–Kubo integral is finite.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The finite-volume current convention, finite Mazur bound, and three-site ring below.

[F1]

Local charge current and finite-volume correlation conventions: jj,j+1=(i/ℏ)[hj,j+1,qj+1], JL=∑jjj,j+1, and CL(t)=L−1Re⁡ωβ,L(JL∘(t)JL∘).

[F2]

Continuity equation for a local lattice charge current: local charge-conserving bond terms give the oriented continuity equation and self-adjoint bond currents.

[F3]

Conserved overlaps bound the finite persistent current correlation: a centered finite current with nonzero overlap with a conserved operator has a strictly positive lower bound on its Cesàro autocorrelation.

[A1]

Take L=3, H3=C3 with orthonormal site basis ∣0⟩,∣1⟩,∣2⟩, indices modulo 3, qj=q∗∣j⟩⟨j∣ with a fixed q∗>0 of unit Q, and hj,j+1=−g(∣j⟩⟨j+1∣+∣j+1⟩⟨j∣) for an energy g>0. Use finite β>0 and ℏ>0.

Counterexample

Given: [A1], [F1]–[F3]. Let S:=∑j=02∣j+1⟩⟨j∣ be the cyclic shift, H3:=∑jhj,j+1, J3:=∑jjj,j+1, and ρβ,3:=e−βH3/Tr⁡(e−βH3).

1.1givenA1F1F2algebra

Each hj,j+1 acts only on the span of ∣j⟩,∣j+1⟩, so it commutes with every qk outside those two sites and with qj+qj+1. The definition [F1] therefore applies. By [F2], each bond current is self-adjoint, so J3=J3∗. Direct multiplication gives H3=−g(S+S∗) and J3=(iq∗g/ℏ)(S−S∗). Since S is unitary, S commutes with S∗; hence [H3,J3]=0, and J3≠0.

2.1givenA1step 1.1algebra

In the Fourier basis of the three-cycle, H3 has eigenvalues −2g,g,g, while J3 has eigenvalues 0,3q∗g/ℏ,−3q∗g/ℏ in the corresponding order. The two states with energy g have equal Gibbs weight, so ωβ,3(J3)=0. Positive definiteness of ρβ,3 and J3≠0 give c:=ωβ,3(J32)=6q∗2g2/(ℏ2(e3βg+2))>0, with unit Q2 s−2.

3.1F1step 1.1step 2.1algebra

Because [H3,J3]=0, Heisenberg evolution fixes J3 for all t. Thus J3∘=J3 and C3(t)=c/3 is a positive constant. Therefore ∫0∞∣C3(t)∣ dt=+∞, refuting the statement.

4.1F3step 2.1step 3.1algebra∎

In the finite Mazur bound [F3], choose the single conserved operator Q1=J3. Then G11=v1=c, so the lower bound on the Cesàro average of the unnormalized autocorrelation Re⁡ωβ,3(αt(J3)J3) is c>0. The per-site convention in the definition gives C3(t)=13Re⁡ωβ,3(αt(J3)J3), so the Mazur contribution for the Cesàro average of C3 is c/3, equal to the constant correlation found in step 3.1. This remains a finite-volume obstruction only; no thermodynamic Drude weight is inferred.

Diagram

The arrows show the orientation j→j+1 used in [F1]. The diagram records the three-site ring in [A1]; the proof computes its matrices directly and does not use the picture.

q0q1q2j0;1j1;2j2;0

Sources