Alphabeta Math
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.

Circular timelike orbit and reduced radial stability

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

This page extends the Schwarzschild circular-orbit potential test to a fully specified Lyapunov result for the reduced radial system at fixed angular momentum, including the degenerate marginal radius. It also derives the null-geodesic radial first integral before stating exact impact-parameter regimes and their conditional Kruskal capture interpretation. The static-observer result combines exact clock and frequency ratios, proper acceleration, and a uniform weak-field logarithmic remainder.

The final section defines a purely mathematical relativistic Coulomb phase system, proves its repulsive scattering branch and angle, and then conditionally identifies it with the current external-charge test-body model in SI units. Two short local calculus lemmas supply the sine-to-angle limit and reciprocal inverse-tangent identity used in the asymptotic and Newtonian-limit arguments. No source recoil, radiation, self-field, full-orbit stability, finite-wavelength optics, or measurement claim is included. Draft suppliers from the concurrently authored rpm-external-charge page are cited only at their inspected interfaces and remain explicit unresolved inputs until their Step 1 review is complete.

Prerequisite frameworks: cm-math-central, cm-math-dynamics, gr-spherical-vacuum-model, and rpm-external-charge.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

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

Lyapunov stability of Schwarzschild circular orbits in the fixed-angular-momentum radial system

Physical scope

Conditional conclusion of the adopted Schwarzschild vacuum and free-fall model for the one-dimensional timelike radial subsystem at fixed angular momentum. Lyapunov stability is only for the reduced state (r, dr/dτ); it is not stability of the full spacetime orbit, against angular-momentum perturbations, or against radiation reaction, self-force, finite-size effects, or observations.

Statement

Adopt the Schwarzschild vacuum exterior model with m∗>0, s=2GNm∗/c2>0 and f(r)=1−s/r, together with its ideal-free-fall rule that a massive test body follows a future timelike geodesic. For a fixed angular-momentum magnitude ℓ>0, set

Wℓ(r)=f(r)(c2+ℓ2r2),r>s.

The equatorial reduced radial system is

r˙=w,w˙=−12Wℓ′(r),

where dot denotes proper-time derivative and ℓ is held fixed. Use SI: r,s are lengths in metres, proper time τ is in seconds, w=dr/dτ and c are speeds in metres per second, ℓ has units square metres per second, and Wℓ has units squared speed. Lyapunov stability means the Euclidean definition of Equilibria, Lyapunov stability and asymptotic stability of an autonomous first-order system applied to the dimensionless state (q,v)=(r/s,w/c) and time T=cτ/s. Equivalently, the distance between radial states is d((r,w),(r~,w~))=((r−r~)/s)2+((w−w~)/c)2. For every circular timelike radius rc>3s/2, the corresponding equilibrium is

zc=(rc,0),ℓ2=c2src22rc−3s.

Then this equilibrium is Lyapunov stable in these dimensionless Euclidean coordinates when rc>3s, and is not Lyapunov stable when 3s/2<rc≤3s. At rc=3s the equilibrium is a stationary inflection of Wℓ, not a strict extremum, and is still not Lyapunov stable. These are conclusions about the reduced radial system at fixed ℓ only.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The stated Schwarzschild vacuum model, its free-fall rule, c,s>0, a fixed ℓ>0, and the reduced radial state space (s,∞)×R.

[A1]

The adopted Schwarzschild model uses the exterior datum and ideal freely falling massive test bodies follow future timelike geodesics; this is a model assumption, not an empirical premise (The Schwarzschild exterior vacuum model: field law, static clock readings and the mass parameter, Adopted clock, free-fall and light-ray assumptions of the classical gravitational framework).

[F1]

For an equatorial timelike geodesic with fixed conserved angular momentum ℓ, the radial equation is r˙2=e2−Wℓ(r) and, on a radial interval, r¨=−Wℓ′(r)/2 (Conserved quantities and equatorial radial reduction of timelike geodesics of the Schwarzschild exterior model).

[F2]

A circular timelike orbit at rc>3s/2 has ℓ2=c2src2/(2rc−3s); the published supplier defines Vℓ=Wℓ/2 and gives Vℓ′′(rc)=c2s(rc−3s)/(rc3(2rc−3s)), so Wℓ′′(rc)=2c2s(rc−3s)/(rc3(2rc−3s)) at fixed ℓ. Its sign gives a strict local minimum for rc>3s and a strict local maximum for 3s/2<rc<3s (Circular timelike geodesics, their radial-potential stability threshold, and the photon sphere at r = 3s/2 clause (c)).

[F3]

Lyapunov stability in (q,v) quantifies over every sufficiently small dimensionless Euclidean initial-state ball and every maximal solution, requiring forward existence for all T≥0 and continued containment in a prescribed ball (Equilibria, Lyapunov stability and asymptotic stability of an autonomous first-order system).

[F4]

The smooth radial vector field is locally Lipschitz, so every initial state has a unique local solution (Picard-Lindelöf local existence and uniqueness for first-order systems).

[F5]

A solution of an autonomous locally Lipschitz ODE whose state remains in a compact subset of its open state domain near a finite endpoint extends beyond that endpoint (Compact continuation for locally Lipschitz ODEs: a solution whose graph stays in a compact subset of the domain near a finite endpoint extends past it clause 2).

Proof

technique · reduce geodesic motion to the fixed-$\ell$ radial ODE, use its conserved one-dimensional energy, and apply the definition of Lyapunov stability plus compact continuation
1.1givenF1F2F4algebra

By [F1], the reduced vector field is Fℓ(r,w)=(w,−Wℓ′(r)/2) on the open set (s,∞)×R. It is smooth there and [F4] gives a unique local solution through every state; uniqueness lets one glue all solutions through the same initial state on the union of their intervals to obtain its maximal solution. The change of variables (q,v,T)=(r/s,w/c,cτ/s) gives dq/dT=v and dv/dT=−sWℓ′(sq)/(2c2) on (1,∞)×R. This invertible scaling preserves maximality, compact containment and existence for all nonnegative time. Differentiating Wℓ=f(c2+ℓ2/r2) gives Wℓ′=c2s/r2−2ℓ2/r3+3sℓ2/r4; substituting the circular value of ℓ2 from [F2] yields Wℓ′(rc)=0, so Fℓ(rc,0)=0. Along every solution, Hℓ(r,w):=12(w2+Wℓ(r)) satisfies dHℓ/dτ=w(−Wℓ′/2)+(Wℓ′/2)w=0. Thus Hℓ is constant on each solution interval.

2.1step 1.1F2F3F4F5algebra

Suppose rc>3s. By [F2], Wℓ′′(rc)>0, so continuity gives an interval about rc on which Wℓ′′>0. Since Wℓ′(rc)=0, the derivative is negative to the left and positive to the right there; hence Wℓ has a strict local minimum. Fix any dimensionless phase-space radius ε>0 whose closed ball about (rc/s,0) lies in (1,∞)×R. Choose a length 0<η<sε/2 so [rc−η,rc+η]⊂(s,∞) and both boundary values of Wℓ exceed Wℓ(rc). By continuity of Hℓ, choose 0<δ≤ε so every state at distance d<δ from zc has ∣r−rc∣<η/2, energy below both boundary potential halves, and Hℓ−Wℓ(rc)/2<c2ε2/8. Conservation in 1.1 prevents such a solution from reaching either radial boundary, since there Hℓ≥Wℓ(rc±η)/2. Inside the resulting radial interval Wℓ(r)≥Wℓ(rc), so w2/2=Hℓ−Wℓ(r)/2<c2ε2/8 and ∣w∣/c<ε/2. The state stays in a compact subset of the open domain; [F5] rules out a finite forward maximal endpoint. With ∣r−rc∣/s<η/s<ε/2 and ∣w∣/c<ε/2, it remains inside the prescribed phase-space ball for every τ≥0. This is Lyapunov stability by [F3].

2.2step 1.1F2F3F4F5algebra

Suppose 3s/2<rc<3s. By [F2], Wℓ′′(rc)<0; shrink η>0 so Wℓ′(r)<0 on (rc,rc+η]. For any proposed initial-state radius δ>0, choose r0∈(rc,rc+min⁡{η/2,sδ/2}) and initial data (r0,0). [F4] supplies a local solution. Its acceleration is −Wℓ′(r0)/2>0, and conservation of Hℓ gives, on the outgoing branch, w=Wℓ(r0)−Wℓ(r). The travel-time integral to rc+η is ∫r0rc+η[Wℓ(r0)−Wℓ(r)]−1/2dr, whose only endpoint singularity is bounded by a constant times (r−r0)−1/2 because Wℓ′(r0)<0. Before reaching that radius, the energy identity bounds w on the compact radial interval [r0,rc+η], so the state stays in a compact subset of (s,∞)×R near any finite maximal endpoint. The compact-continuation result [F5] therefore prevents finite-time termination before the finite travel time; the solution reaches rc+η and leaves the fixed d-ball of dimensionless radius η/s. Since d((r0,0),zc)=∣r0−rc∣/s can be made smaller than every proposed δ, this contradicts [F3].

2.3step 1.1F1F2F3F4F5algebra

At rc=3s, the circular relation gives ℓ2=3c2s2. Differentiating Wℓ(r)=c2(1−s/r)+ℓ2(r−2−sr−3) at this fixed ℓ gives Wℓ′(r)=c2s(r−3s)2/r4 and Wℓ′′(r)=−2c2s(r−3s)(r−6s)/r5. Thus Wℓ′ is positive except at 3s and Wℓ′′ changes sign there, so the equilibrium is a stationary inflection. Fix 0<η<s and, for any δ>0, choose r0∈(3s−min⁡{η/2,sδ/2},3s) with initial data (r0,0). [F4] supplies a local solution. The acceleration is negative. On the inward branch energy conservation yields w=−Wℓ(r0)−Wℓ(r) for 3s−η≤r<r0, since Wℓ is strictly increasing on that interval. The travel-time integral to 3s−η is finite; near r0 its integrand is bounded by a constant times (r0−r)−1/2 because Wℓ′(r0)>0. The energy identity bounds w while r stays in the compact interval [3s−η,r0]⊂(s,∞), so [F5] extends the solution past any finite maximal endpoint before its finite travel time. It therefore reaches 3s−η, leaving the fixed d-ball of dimensionless radius η/s. Since d((r0,0),zc)=∣r0−rc∣/s can be made smaller than every proposed δ, [F3] says the equilibrium is not Lyapunov stable.

3.1step 2.1step 2.2step 2.3A1given∎

The two subcritical cases in 2.2–2.3 are not Lyapunov stable, while the supercritical case in 2.1 is Lyapunov stable. These are deductions under the adopted Schwarzschild free-fall model [A1] and concern only its fixed-angular-momentum radial subsystem.

Remarks

  • The endpoint rc=3s is degenerate: Wℓ′′(rc)=0. The one-sided energy argument above establishes instability without calling the potential maximum or minimum.
  • The statement does not perturb ℓ and does not imply orbital stability in the full geodesic phase space.
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

Null geodesic radial first integral in the Schwarzschild exterior

Statement

Let (M,g,N) be the Schwarzschild exterior datum with s>0 and f(r)=1−s/r on r>s, with the countable-choice hypothesis of its geometric suppliers. Let γ:J→M be a smooth affinely parametrized geodesic of its metric-selected connection on a real interval J with nonempty interior, with nonzero tangent and g(γ′,γ′)=0, whose image lies in the equatorial plane ϑ=π/2. Orient its affine parameter toward the future, so that

E:=f(r)dx0dλ>0,L:=r2dφdλ∈R.

Both quantities are constant along γ. Reversing the affine parameter changes both signs and does not change L/E; no sign restriction on L is imposed in the fixed longitude convention. With nonnegative impact parameter b:=∣L∣/E and H(r):=f(r)/r2, its radial equation is

(drdλ)2=E2(1−b2H(r)).

Moreover, H′(r)=(3s−2r)/r4, so H has its unique exterior maximum at rph=3s/2, with H(rph)=4/(27s2). Thus the critical impact parameter for a radial turning point is bc=33 s/2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The smooth Schwarzschild exterior metric with r>s and the countable-choice hypothesis of its geometric suppliers, its metric-selected connection, and a smooth nonconstant affine null geodesic in the equatorial plane, oriented toward the future with E>0 and signed L∈R.

[F1]

In spherical-polar product charts the Schwarzschild metric is diagonal with g00=−f, grr=f−1, gϑϑ=r2, and gφφ=r2sin⁡2ϑ, where f=1−s/r; the smooth exterior is Lorentzian and its metric-selected connection exists (The Schwarzschild exterior model datum: domain, metric, mass parameter and time orientation, The Schwarzschild exterior datum is a smooth time-oriented Lorentzian four-manifold, Metric compatibility, torsion freedom and the metric-selected connection class, Existence and uniqueness of the metric-selected connection of a nondegenerate metric, and its extension to tensor fields).

[F2]

A Killing field ξ contracted with the tangent of an affinely parametrized geodesic has constant scalar product g(ξ,γ′) (Killing fields and conserved currents, and on-shell conservation of the Hilbert stress-energy tensor clause (b)); a Killing field is defined by Lξg=0 (Killing fields of a Lorentzian metric), with the Lie derivative given by its flow pullback derivative (The Lie derivative of a tensor field).

[F3]

An affine geodesic satisfies Dλγ′=0 (Geodesic of an affine connection); the given null condition is g(γ′,γ′)=0.

[F4]

For a function continuous on a closed interval and differentiable on its interior, the mean value theorem equates its endpoint difference to an interior derivative times the interval length (The mean value theorem, as the case g(x)=x of Cauchy's: for f continuous on [a,b] with a<b and differentiable on (a,b) there is c∈(a,b) with f(b)−f(a)=f′(c)(b−a)). A continuous real function on a closed bounded interval takes every value between its endpoint values (Intermediate value theorem, by bisection with a canonical left-half rule: a continuous function on [a,b] takes every value between f(a) and f(b)).

Proof

technique · use the time-translation and axial-rotation symmetries for first integrals, then impose the null condition in the diagonal metric
1.1givenF1F2F3algebra

In each equatorial spherical chart the components in [F1] are independent of x0 and φ, and the coordinate components of ∂0 and the axial generator ∂φ are constant. The flow pullback derivative in [F2] therefore gives L∂0g=L∂φg=0, so both fields are locally Killing. By the conservation part of [F2] and the affine geodesic equation [F3], −g(∂0,γ′)=f dx0/dλ=E and g(∂φ,γ′)=r2dφ/dλ=L are constant on each chart interval; longitude charts differ by additive constants, so these values agree on overlaps and are constant along γ.

2.1step 1.1F1givenalgebra

At ϑ=π/2, the null condition and [F1] give 0=−f(dx0dλ)2+f−1(drdλ)2+r2(dφdλ)2. A nonzero null tangent cannot have dx0/dλ=0, since the remaining quadratic form is positive definite. Its time component has constant sign on J by continuity; the future orientation relative to N=∂0 gives −g(N,γ′)=E>0. Parameter reversal flips both E and L, leaving their ratio invariant. Substitute dx0/dλ=E/f and dφ/dλ=L/r2, then multiply by f>0. The result is (dr/dλ)2=E2[1−(L/E)2f/r2]=E2[1−b2H(r)], valid for either sign of L.

3.1step 2.1F4algebra

Differentiating H(r)=r−2−sr−3 yields H′(r)=−2r−3+3sr−4=(3s−2r)/r4. Since r4>0, this derivative is positive on (s,3s/2) and negative on (3s/2,∞); the mean value theorem in [F4] gives strict increase and decrease on these respective intervals, hence the unique maximum is at 3s/2. Substitution gives H(3s/2)=4/(27s2), and solving b2H(3s/2)=1 gives bc=33s/2.

4.1step 2.1step 3.1F4givenalgebra∎

The right side of the radial first integral vanishes at a radius precisely when b2H(r)=1. Since H is positive on r>s, tends to zero at both ends, and has the maximum computed in the preceding step, no root exists for 0≤b<bc, whereas b=bc gives the root 3s/2. For b>bc, choose R>3s/2 so large that H(R)<1/b2<H(3s/2); continuity and the intermediate value theorem in [F4] on [3s/2,R] give an exterior root. Thus the threshold for the existence of an exterior root is exactly bc. This is a first-integral statement only; it asserts no global scattering continuation.

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

Schwarzschild null scattering and critical impact, with conditional Kruskal capture

Physical scope

Conditional geodesic predictions for ideal rays in the adopted Schwarzschild exterior model. Capture beyond r=s is asserted only conditionally in the named Kruskal extension. The statement excludes finite wavelength, wave optics, source/apparatus modelling, plasma, rotation, self-gravity, and empirical shadow or lensing claims.

Statement

Adopt the Schwarzschild exterior vacuum model with s>0 and the ideal-light rule that rays are future null geodesics. For an equatorial incoming ray with constants E>0, L≥0, impact parameter b=L/E, and

H(r)=1−s/rr2,bc=332s,rph=32s,

the radial first integral is r˙2=E2[1−b2H(r)] as in Null geodesic radial first integral in the Schwarzschild exterior, where dot denotes affine-parameter derivative. Then:

  1. If b>bc, there is a unique outer turning point r∗(b)>rph, which is reached in finite affine parameter; the ray from infinity turns and returns to infinity. Its total azimuthal advance is

    Δφ=2∫r∗∞b drr21−b2H(r).

    This integral converges at both endpoints.

  2. If b=bc, the incoming branch from infinity approaches rph only as affine parameter tends to +∞; its azimuthal advance diverges logarithmically.

  3. If 0≤b<bc, the inward branch has no exterior turning point and reaches the boundary r=s of the Schwarzschild exterior in finite affine parameter. Only if the ray is continued in the specified Kruskal model, once it lies in the region U≥0, does the causal escape result imply that it cannot return to the right exterior.

These are geodesic-model deductions. The impact threshold is not by itself an observable shadow radius.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Schwarzschild exterior with s>0, the ideal-light postulate, an equatorial incoming future-null geodesic with E>0 and L≥0, and the Kruskal model only for the conditional continuation in clause 3.

[A1]

In the adopted Schwarzschild vacuum model, ideal light rays are future null geodesics; this is an adopted model rule (The Schwarzschild exterior vacuum model: field law, static clock readings and the mass parameter, Adopted clock, free-fall and light-ray assumptions of the classical gravitational framework clause (iii)).

[F1]

For an equatorial affinely parametrized null geodesic, E=f dx0/dλ and L=r2dφ/dλ are constant, and r˙2=E2(1−b2f/r2); H=f/r2 has its unique maximum 4/(27s2) at 3s/2 (Null geodesic radial first integral in the Schwarzschild exterior).

[F2]

The smooth geodesic equation has a unique local geodesic through each initial event and tangent, and compact containment in its open coordinate-state domain permits continuation by the local ODE continuation theorem (The geodesic initial-value problem and the exponential map of the metric-selected connection, Compact continuation for locally Lipschitz ODEs: a solution whose graph stays in a compact subset of the domain near a finite endpoint extends past it).

[F3]

The Kruskal datum is the smooth extension specified by The Kruskal model datum: domain, implicit radial function, metric and time orientation. In that model every future-directed causal curve has nondecreasing U,V, and points with U≥0 cannot reach the right exterior (The causal cone, the escape horizon and decreasing areal radius in the Kruskal model clauses (b), (d)).

[F4]

The exterior metric has the global product form g=−f d(x0)2+f−1dr2+r2γS2, where γS2 is the round metric induced from R3 (The Schwarzschild exterior model datum: domain, metric, mass parameter and time orientation); its metric-selected connection is the unique torsion-free, metric-compatible connection (Existence and uniqueness of the metric-selected connection of a nondegenerate metric, and its extension to tensor fields).

[F5]

Along an affinely parametrized geodesic, the squared tangent norm is constant: metric compatibility and Dλη′=0 give ddλg(η′,η′)=2g(Dλη′,η′)=0 (Covariant differentiation along curves: metric pairing, parallel transport and geodesic speed clause 3).

Proof

technique · construct a null ray from large radius, classify the radial first integral by the maximum of $H$, integrate at the simple and double roots, and use Kruskal causality only for the stated conditional continuation
1.1givenA1F2F4F5algebra

Choose R>rph so b2H(R)<1. At r=R, set ϑ=π/2, x˙0=E/f(R), r˙=−E1−b2H(R), ϑ˙=0, and φ˙=L/R2, with L=bE. Substitution into the diagonal Schwarzschild metric gives g(η˙,η˙)=−E2f(R)+E2f(R)(1−b2H(R))+L2R2=0. Also g(η˙,∂0)=−E<0, so the initial tangent is future directed, and [F2] gives a unique local geodesic. It remains equatorial: define the sphere reflection S(y1,y2,y3)=(y1,y2,−y3) and Ψ(x0,r,ω)=(x0,r,Sω). The reflection is orthogonal, so it preserves the induced round metric; [F4] therefore makes Ψ an isometry of the exterior metric. Pulling back the metric-selected connection by Ψ gives another torsion-free, metric-compatible connection, hence the same connection by uniqueness in [F4]; thus Ψ∘η is an affinely parametrized geodesic. At the initial event y3=0, and ϑ˙=0 makes the initial tangent lie in the fixed tangent plane of S, so Ψ fixes both initial data. Geodesic uniqueness [F2] gives Ψ∘η=η on the connected maximal interval, and its image lies in the fixed set y3=0, the equatorial plane. Finally [F5] preserves the initial null norm along the geodesic, so it is null throughout.

2.1step 1.1F1F2algebra

By [F1], along the equatorial null geodesic r˙2=E2(1−b2H(r)). For r≥R, H is decreasing and b2H(r)<1, so the past-directed parameter branch has r˙<0 and extends through every finite radial interval [R,R′]: the first integral bounds r˙, while f(r)≥f(R)>0 bounds x˙0=E/f(r) and φ˙=L/r2; compact continuation [F2] excludes a finite-parameter endpoint there. As r→∞, H(r)→0 and r˙→−E, so the affine distance to infinity is ∫R∞dr/[E1−b2H(r)]=∞. Hence the constructed solution supplies an incoming ray from infinity for every b≥0.

3.1step 2.1F1algebra

By [F1], H increases on (s,rph), decreases on (rph,∞), and vanishes at both exterior ends. If b>bc, then b2H(rph)>1, so there is one root r−∈(s,rph) and one simple outer root r∗>rph. The affine time from any finite large radius to r∗ is finite because near the simple root [E1−b2H(r)]−1=O((r−r∗)−1/2).

3.2step 2.1F1algebra

If b=bc, direct factorization gives 1−bc2H(r)=(2r−3s)2(r+3s)/(4r3). The incoming radial speed vanishes linearly as r↓rph; hence the affine integral diverges like ∫dr/(r−rph). The angular integrand has the same simple-pole behavior, so the ray approaches the photon sphere only at infinite affine parameter and accumulates logarithmically divergent azimuth.

3.3step 2.1F1F3algebra

If 0≤b<bc, then b2H(r)<1 for every r>s by [F1]. The inward branch has no turning point and reaches the exterior boundary r=s in finite affine parameter because 1−b2H(r)→1 there. The exterior calculation ends at that boundary. If a future continuation is placed in the Kruskal model and enters U≥0, [F3] prevents it from returning to the right exterior.

4.1step 2.1step 3.1F1F2algebra

For b>bc, [F2] extends the incoming ray through the outer turn. Away from r∗, differentiating the radial first integral and dividing by r˙≠0 gives r¨=−E2b2H′(r)/2; smoothness of the geodesic makes r¨ continuous at the simple root, so this identity holds there as a limit. Since H′(r∗)<0, the acceleration is positive and the ray leaves the turn with r˙>0. On every finite segment with r≥r∗, the conserved quantities bound ∣r˙∣, ∣x˙0∣=E/f(r) and ∣φ˙∣=L/r2; the state stays in a compact subset of the smooth exterior tangent domain and cannot end at a finite affine parameter by [F2]. On the outgoing branch r˙→E>0, while ∣r˙∣≤E, so it reaches arbitrarily large radii only at infinite affine parameter. Also ∣dφ/dr∣=b/[r21−b2H(r)] is O((r−r∗)−1/2) at the turn and O(r−2) at infinity; integrating both halves gives the convergent formula in clause 1.

5.1step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1step 3.2step 3.3step 4.1A1F3given∎

The simple outer root, critical double root and no-turn regimes in 3.1–3.3 give all three clauses. Only the last clause uses the separate Kruskal continuation, and no observation or apparatus model is used.

Remarks

  • At b=bc the circular null orbit is an unstable separatrix; the logarithmic divergence describes the ideal ray geodesic, not a finite-resolution image.
  • The capture statement beyond r=s depends on the stated Kruskal continuation. Schwarzschild exterior coordinates alone stop at their boundary and do not prove nonreturn in an extension.
Physics theoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

Static-clock redshift, proper acceleration, and a controlled weak-field expansion in Schwarzschild

Physical scope

Conditional model prediction for ideal static clocks, observer energy/frequency ratios in geometric optics, and the proper acceleration required to remain static in the Schwarzschild exterior. The weak-field statement is a uniform mathematical remainder bound. No clock, spectral, acceleration, or gravitational-field measurement is asserted.

Statement

Adopt the Schwarzschild exterior vacuum model datum (M,g,N) of The Schwarzschild exterior vacuum model: field law, static clock readings and the mass parameter with m∗>0, s=2GNm∗/c2>0 and f(r)=1−s/r. Let rE,rR>s be the emitter and receiver radii of static observers in this model. Let Δt≠0 be a common Schwarzschild coordinate-time duration over which ideal clocks on these static worldlines accrue proper-time increments ΔτE and ΔτR. For the frequency ratio, let η:J→M be a specified smooth, affinely parametrized future-directed null geodesic in the exterior and choose λE<λR in J so that η(λE) and η(λR) lie on the static worldlines at radii rE and rR, respectively. Let ωE and ωR be the ideal geometric-optics frequencies assigned by the corresponding static observers at these endpoint events, using the model's geometric-optics identification with observer energy. With n=f−1/2∂0 the unit static congruence and U=cn the corresponding four-velocity, the ideal-clock and geometric-optics predictions are

ΔτRΔτE=ωEωR=f(rR)f(rE),ωRωE=f(rE)f(rR).

The proper four-acceleration magnitude required to remain static at radius r>s is

a(r)=g(∇UU,∇UU)=c2s2r2f(r)=GNm∗r21−s/r.

For any 0≤ρ<1 and radii satisfying 0<s/rE,s/rR≤ρ, define xi=s/ri and write log⁡:=L for the natural integral logarithm of The integral logarithm L(x):=∫1xdtt for x>0. The exact logarithmic ratio has the uniform expansion

log⁡ωRωE=s2(1rR−1rE)+R,∣R∣≤xE2+xR24(1−ρ).

These are conditional deductions of the idealized model; no measured redshift or acceleration is asserted.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Schwarzschild vacuum exterior model with s>0, static observers at rE,rR>s, an ideal-clock reading of proper time, and the geometric-optics interpretation of the observer-energy ratio.

[A1]

Ideal clocks on future timelike worldlines record proper time, including clocks on accelerated static worldlines; these observers are constrained, not freely falling. Ideal rays follow future null geodesics in the geometric-optics approximation, and the observer-energy ratio is read as their frequency ratio. Adopt these rules in the smooth test-field regime, with no back-reaction, self-force, finite-size or tidal corrections, dispersion, dissipation or quantum effects (The Schwarzschild exterior vacuum model: field law, static clock readings and the mass parameter clauses (b), (d), Adopted clock, free-fall and light-ray assumptions of the classical gravitational framework clauses (i), (iii), (iv)); the massive free-fall rule in clause (ii) is not used for static observers.

[F1]

The static congruence is n=f−1/2∂0, with g(n,n)=−1, Δτ=f(r)Δt, and ∇nn=(s/(2r2))∂r (The static observer congruence of the Schwarzschild exterior model: unit field, integral curves, acceleration and clock-rate ratios clauses (a), (c), (e)).

[F2]

For a specified future null geodesic between static observers, ωR/ωE=f(rE)/f(rR) under the geometric-optics interpretation (Restricted redshift prediction of the Schwarzschild vacuum model: the observer-energy ratio between static observers clauses (b), (d)).

[F3]

In the Schwarzschild exterior grr=f−1, f=1−s/r, and s=2GNm∗/c2 (The Schwarzschild exterior model datum: domain, metric, mass parameter and time orientation).

[F4]

The natural logarithm is the integral logarithm L(y)=∫1ydt/t for y>0, and a continuous integrand has its integral function as a primitive (The integral logarithm L(x):=∫1xdtt for x>0, The first fundamental theorem: if f is integrable on [a,b] and continuous at c, then F′(c)=f(c); in particular a continuous f has F as a primitive).

[F5]

If two continuous real functions satisfy g≤h on an interval, their integrals preserve that order (If f≤g on [a,b] and both are integrable then ∫abf≤∫abg; and m(b−a)≤∫abf≤M(b−a)).

[F6]

The mean value theorem applies to continuous functions on closed intervals that are differentiable on their interiors; in particular, a function differentiable on an open interval with derivative zero is constant there (The mean value theorem, as the case g(x)=x of Cauchy's: for f continuous on [a,b] with a<b and differentiable on (a,b) there is c∈(a,b) with f(b)−f(a)=f′(c)(b−a)).

Proof

technique · combine the exact static observer identities and redshift ratio, scale the acceleration from unit observer to four-velocity, and bound the logarithmic remainder by an integral inequality
1.1F1F3algebra

By [F1], U=cn is the static observer four-velocity because g(U,U)=−c2. Since c is constant, ∇UU=c2∇nn=c2s∂r/(2r2). With g(∂r,∂r)=f−1 from [F3], its squared norm is c4s2/(4r4f), so its positive magnitude is c2s/(2r2f). Substituting s=2GNm∗/c2 gives the displayed Newton-constant form.

1.2A1F1F2algebra

Over the same coordinate-time interval, [F1] gives ΔτR/ΔτE=f(rR)/f(rE). [F2] gives the inverse ratio for received to emitted ideal-ray frequency, so the two displayed exact ratios follow. Each ratio is a conditional model result for the specified static observers and ideal ray.

1.3F2F4F6algebra

By [F4], L′(y)=1/y for y>0 and L(1)=0. For fixed q>0, the function a↦L(a/q)−L(a) has derivative 1/a−1/a=0 on (0,∞) by the chain rule. It is constant by [F6], and its value at a=q is −L(q), so L(a/q)=L(a)−L(q). Likewise y↦L(y2)−2L(y) has derivative 2/y−2/y=0 for y>0 and value zero at 1, hence vanishes by [F6]. Setting y=a/q>0 yields L(a/q)=12[L(a)−L(q)]. Taking a=1−xE and q=1−xR in the positive frequency ratio of [F2] establishes the logarithmic ratio identity used below.

2.1step 1.3F2F4F5F6givenalgebra

For 0<x≤ρ<1, the chain rule and [F4] show that dlog⁡(1−x)/dx=−1/(1−x)=−1−x/(1−x). By [F4] the function log⁡(1−x)+x+∫0xt/(1−t) dt has derivative zero for 0<x<1 and is continuous at 0, where it vanishes. Applying [F6] on [0,x] gives log⁡(1−x)=−x−∫0xt1−t dt,0≤∫0xt1−t dt≤11−ρ∫0xt dt=x22(1−ρ). For t∈[0,x], 0≤t/(1−t)≤t/(1−ρ). Thus [F5] and ∫0xt dt=x2/2 give the displayed bound. By [F2] and step 1.3, log⁡(ωR/ωE)=12[log⁡(1−xE)−log⁡(1−xR)]. Inserting the integral identity separates the linear term (xR−xE)/2=s(1/rR−1/rE)/2. The remaining terms have absolute value at most half the sum of their nonnegative integral bounds, namely (xE2+xR2)/(4(1−ρ)).

3.1step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 2.1A1∎

The exact ratios, acceleration magnitude and uniform remainder bound are all consequences of the stated model identities; no empirical input is used.

Remarks

  • The static congruence is accelerated. The divergence of its required proper acceleration as r↓s is not a divergence of the Schwarzschild curvature invariant and does not make the exterior-coordinate boundary a curvature singularity.
  • The frequency ratio assumes an ideal geometric-optics ray. Propagation through matter, finite wavelength, moving endpoints and measurement apparatus require additional models.
DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: Not applicableverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

Repulsive relativistic Coulomb Hamiltonian phase system

Physical scope

Pure mathematical definition of a smooth relativistic phase-space ODE with repulsive inverse-radius potential. It does not identify parameters with measured quantities or assert an electromagnetic model.

Definition

Let m,c,κ>0, let x,p∈R3, and set

D:=(R3∖{0})×R3,r:=∣x∣,E(p):=m2c4+c2∣p∣2.

The repulsive relativistic Coulomb Hamiltonian is

H(x,p):=E(p)+κr,

and its phase system is the autonomous ODE on the open set D

x˙=∇pH=c2pE(p),p˙=−∇xH=κxr3.

Here the system parameter t is time in seconds and dot denotes d/dt; m is a positive mass parameter (kilograms in the SI interpretation), c a positive speed parameter (metres per second), and κ a positive energy-times-length parameter (joule-metres). Define the radial momentum pr:=x⋅p/r and angular-momentum vector J:=x×p. A trajectory is a C1 map z=(x,p):I→D on a real interval I with nonempty interior, satisfying this ODE in the interval-solution sense of First-order systems, initial value problems, and solutions on intervals. A trajectory z~:I~→D extends z if I⊆I~ and z~∣I=z; it is a proper extension if I⊊I~. A trajectory is maximal if it has no proper extension as a solution of this same system in D. This definition alone asserts neither existence nor uniqueness of maximal trajectories.

This is only a mathematical phase system. Its physical interpretation as a charged particle in an externally prescribed Coulomb field requires separate model assumptions.

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

The sine-to-angle limit at the origin

Physical scope

Pure real-analysis limit used to identify the impact parameter from the asymptotic angular gap; it is not a physical assumption.

Statement

The limit over nonzero real x is

lim⁡x→0sin⁡xx=1.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The real sine and cosine functions.

[F1]

Sine and cosine are differentiable on R, sin⁡0=0, cos⁡0=1, and sin⁡′=cos⁡, cos⁡′=−sin⁡ (The derivatives of sine and cosine are cosine and minus sine).

[F2]

Differentiability at every point of an interval implies continuity there (A function differentiable at c is continuous at c).

Proof

technique · apply the mean value theorem on the interval between $0$ and $x$, then use continuity of cosine at $0$
1.1givenF1F2F3algebra

Fix x≠0. By [F1] and [F2], sine is continuous on the closed interval with endpoints 0,x and differentiable in its interior. By [F3] there is ξx strictly between 0 and x such that sin⁡x/x=(sin⁡x−sin⁡0)/(x−0)=cos⁡ξx.

2.1step 1.1F1F2givenalgebra∎

Given ε>0, [F1] and [F2] make cosine continuous at 0, so choose δ>0 such that ∣t∣<δ implies ∣cos⁡t−1∣<ε. If 0<∣x∣<δ, then ∣ξx∣<∣x∣<δ and step 1.1 yields ∣sin⁡x/x−1∣=∣cos⁡ξx−1∣<ε. This is the stated limit.

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

Reciprocal positive arguments of the principal inverse tangent

Physical scope

Pure trigonometric identity for the principal inverse tangent; it is used only to rewrite a formal model limit.

Statement

For every y>0,

arctan⁡y+arctan⁡(1/y)=π2,

where arctan⁡ takes values in (−π/2,π/2).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A positive real y and the principal inverse-tangent convention.

[F1]

Tangent is a continuous strictly increasing bijection from (−π/2,π/2) onto R, and its inverse obeys tan⁡(arctan⁡z)=z and arctan⁡(tan⁡u)=u on that interval (The principal inverse tangent arctan⁡:R→(−π/2,π/2), Tangent is a continuous strictly increasing bijection from (−π/2,π/2) onto R).

[F2]

Tangent is sin⁡u/cos⁡u on the domain where cosine is nonzero (Tangent, cotangent, secant, and cosecant on their exact natural domains).

[F4]

Cosine is positive on [0,π/2) and tangent is defined on (−π/2,π/2) (Signs, monotonicity intervals, and ranges of sine and cosine, Tangent, cotangent, secant, and cosecant on their exact natural domains).

Proof

technique · use the complementary-angle tangent identity and uniqueness of the principal inverse
1.1givenF1F2F3algebra

Put u=arctan⁡y. By [F3], tan⁡0=0; [F1] therefore gives arctan⁡0=0. Since y>0 and the inverse in [F1] is strictly increasing, u>0, while its range gives u<π/2.

2.1step 1.1F2F3F4givenalgebra

The angle π/2−u lies in (0,π/2). The shift and parity identities in [F3] give sin⁡(π/2−u)=cos⁡u and cos⁡(π/2−u)=sin⁡u. By [F4], cos⁡u>0; because tan⁡u=y>0 and tan⁡u=sin⁡u/cos⁡u, also sin⁡u>0. Thus tangent is defined at both u and π/2−u, and [F2] gives tan⁡(π/2−u)=cos⁡u/sin⁡u=1/y.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1F1givenalgebra∎

Since π/2−u∈(−π/2,π/2), the inverse identity in [F1] yields arctan⁡(1/y)=π/2−u. Substituting u=arctan⁡y proves the formula.

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

Exact repulsive relativistic Coulomb scattering branch

Physical scope

Exact mathematical scattering result for the defined one-body Hamiltonian phase system on a noncolliding repulsive branch. It asserts no electromagnetic derivation, recoil, radiation, measurement, or empirical applicability.

Statement

Consider the phase system of Repulsive relativistic Coulomb Hamiltonian phase system with m,c,κ>0. Let a trajectory have conserved energy W>mc2 and angular-momentum magnitude J:=∣x×p∣>κ/c. Define

A:=W2−m2c4c2>0,d:=Wκc2>0,C:=J2−κ2c2>0.

Then its squared radial momentum is

pr2=Q(u):=A−2du−Cu2,u:=1/r.

There is a unique positive simple root

u∗:=d2+CA−dC,0<u∗<W−mc2κ.

Every trajectory through the turning data r∗=1/u∗, pr=0, and ∣x×p∣=J has a unique maximal extension defined for all system times t∈R, in the extension sense of Repulsive relativistic Coulomb Hamiltonian phase system. This extension has one noncollision periapsis and is asymptotically incoming and outgoing. Its impact parameter, defined as the limiting perpendicular distance of either asymptote from the force center, is

b=JA>0.

If Δ is the positive azimuthal change from either asymptote to periapsis, then

Δ=JCarctan⁡(CAd),θ:=π−2Δ∈(0,π),

where θ is the angle between the incoming and outgoing asymptotic velocity vectors. This formula is for the repulsive branch J>κ/c; it does not cover J≤κ/c.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The phase system on D, fixed m,c,κ>0, a trajectory with H=W>mc2 and ∣J∣>κ/c, and the Euclidean norm and cross product of R3.

[F1]

The system equations are x˙=c2p/E(p) and p˙=κx/r3, with H=E(p)+κ/r, pr=x⋅p/r, and J=x×p (Repulsive relativistic Coulomb Hamiltonian phase system).

[F2]

A smooth vector field has a unique local solution through each initial state, and a solution staying in a compact subset of its open domain near a finite endpoint extends past that endpoint (Picard-Lindelöf local existence and uniqueness for first-order systems, Compact continuation for locally Lipschitz ODEs: a solution whose graph stays in a compact subset of the domain near a finite endpoint extends past it).

[F6]

lim⁡z→0sin⁡z/z=1 (The sine-to-angle limit at the origin).

Proof

technique · conserve the Hamiltonian and angular momentum, factor the radial polynomial, construct the global branch by ODE continuation, and integrate the exact polar equation
1.1givenF1algebra

Along any solution of [F1], H˙=∇xH⋅x˙+∇pH⋅p˙=∇xH⋅∇pH−∇pH⋅∇xH=0, and J˙=x˙×p+x×p˙=0 because x˙ is parallel to p and p˙ is parallel to x. Thus W and J are constant. With u=1/r, the energy relation gives E=W−κu, so c2∣p∣2=(W−κu)2−m2c4, and ∣p∣2=pr2+J2/r2. Rearranging yields pr2=A−2du−Cu2=Q(u).

2.1step 1.1givenalgebra

Since Q(0)=A>0 and Q((W−mc2)/κ)=−J2((W−mc2)/κ)2<0, continuity gives a positive root below (W−mc2)/κ. The other root is negative because the product of the roots is −A/C<0, so the positive root is unique. The quadratic formula gives the displayed u∗; Q′(u∗)=−2(d+Cu∗)<0, hence the root is simple. At this root E=W−κu∗>mc2, so the momentum is real and the point lies in D.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1F1F2F5algebra

At any turning state choose orthonormal axes e1=x/r∗ and e2=p/∣p∣, and translate its time to 0; then x=r∗e1 and p=(J/r∗)e2. The root equation in 2.1 gives H(x,p)=W, and the smooth field in [F1] satisfies [F2], giving a local solution. By [F2], all solutions through this full initial state agree on their overlapping intervals; their union is a solution on the union interval, is locally a solution near every interior point, and is the unique maximal extension. Its interval is open, since local existence at an included finite endpoint would extend it. Every trajectory through the state is a restriction of this extension by uniqueness. Along it, direct differentiation gives p˙r=c2J2/(Er3)+κ/r2>0 everywhere, so [F5] makes pr strictly increasing with its unique zero at 0; consequently r decreases before the turn and increases after it. On every allowed state 0<u≤u∗<(W−mc2)/κ, hence r≥r∗ and mc2<E=W−κu<W, which gives ∣p∣<A. Also ∣x˙∣<c, so near any finite interval endpoint x remains bounded and ∣x∣≥r∗; together with the momentum bound this gives compact containment in D. Applying [F2] at a finite right endpoint, or to the reversed-time field at a finite left endpoint, would properly extend the maximal solution, a contradiction. Its interval is therefore R. Each monotone radial tail must be unbounded: if it had a finite limit greater than r∗, then Q(1/r) and E would give ∣r˙∣ a positive lower bound, contradicting that finite limit. Thus r→∞ on both tails and r˙=c2pr/E→±c2A/W, so r grows linearly there. Then ∣p˙∣=κ/r2 is integrable, and p converges to incoming and outgoing limits of magnitude A. Since the tangential momentum has magnitude J/r→0, the limiting momenta point along the limiting radial directions, giving the two asymptotic velocity directions.

3.2step 1.1step 2.1F1F3F4algebra

Orient the orbital plane so its polar angle increases with J=∣x×p∣. Then φ˙=c2J/(Er2) and r˙=c2pr/E, so ∣dφ/du∣=J/Q(u) and the half-angle is Δ=∫0u∗J du/A−2du−Cu2. Completing the square gives Q=(d2+CA)/C−C(u+d/C)2. With y=(Cu+d)/d2+CA, the root relation in 2.1 makes the endpoints d/d2+CA and 1, and the integral becomes (J/C)∫dy/1−y2=(J/C)[arcsin⁡y]d/d2+CA1. Put α=arctan⁡(CA/d)∈(0,π/2). Since tan⁡α=CA/d, the Pythagorean identity and positivity of sine and cosine in [F3] give cos⁡α=d/d2+CA; the quarter-turn identity then gives arcsin⁡(d/d2+CA)=π/2−α because both angles lie in [0,π/2]. The evaluated integral is therefore Δ=(J/C)arctan⁡(CA/d).

4.1step 3.2F3algebra

Put α=κ/(cJ)∈(0,1), q=1−α2∈(0,1), and β=1−m2c4/W2∈(0,1). If a=arcsin⁡q, then [F3] gives a∈(0,π/2), sin⁡a=q, and cos⁡a=1−q2>0; hence tan⁡a=q/1−q2 and the principal inverse identity gives a=arctan⁡(q/1−q2). The formula from 3.2 becomes Δ=q−1arctan⁡(βq/1−q2); since 0<β<1 and arctan⁡ is strictly increasing, 0<Δ<arcsin⁡(q)/q.

5.1step 4.1F3F5algebra

Define g(x)=sin⁡x−2x/π on [0,π/2]. By [F3], g(0)=g(π/2)=0 and g′′(x)=−sin⁡x≤0. Since g′ is differentiable and g′′≤0, [F5] makes g′ nonincreasing. For any 0<x<π/2, [F5] applied to g on [0,x] and [x,π/2] gives g(x)/x=g′(ξ1) and −g(x)/(π/2−x)=g′(ξ2) for some 0<ξ1<x<ξ2<π/2. Thus g(x)/x≥−g(x)/(π/2−x); multiplying by the positive x(π/2−x) yields g(x)≥0. Taking x=arcsin⁡q gives arcsin⁡q≤πq/2, hence step 4.1 gives Δ<π/2.

6.1step 3.1step 4.1step 5.1F6algebra

On either asymptotic tail, ∣dφ/dr∣=J/(r2Q(1/r))∼J/(Ar2). For every 0<ϵ<1, the definition of this limit bounds the integrand between (1−ϵ)J/(Ar2) and (1+ϵ)J/(Ar2) for all sufficiently large radii; integration from r to infinity gives the angular gap δ(r)∼J/(Ar). Step 3.1's asymptotic momentum and [F6] now give rsin⁡δ(r)→J/A, the limiting perpendicular distance of each asymptotic line from the force center; this is b. The incoming momentum points opposite its limiting radial direction and the outgoing momentum along its own, so their angular separation is θ=π−2Δ∈(0,π) by step 5.1.

7.1step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1step 3.2step 4.1step 5.1step 6.1given∎

The unique noncollision turning branch, impact parameter and exact deflection angle follow from steps 1.1–6.1 under the stated hypotheses W>mc2 and J>κ/c. This proves the selected C>0 branch, without asserting that J>κ/c is necessary for a positive turning root.

Remarks

  • The potential is repulsive because κ>0; the formula is not an attractive Coulomb capture result.
  • The exact angular scattering formula does not provide a closed time-parametrized orbit. A two-body treatment, recoil, radiation reaction, and finite-source effects are outside this phase system.
Physics theoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

Exact repulsive relativistic Coulomb scattering in the fixed-source test-body model

Physical scope

Conditional model deduction for a single massive charged test body in flat spacetime moving in a prescribed, fixed, repulsive point-source Coulomb field, under the explicitly stated ACω and flat massive-particle assumptions. The exact angle applies only for W>mc² and J>κ/c. Source recoil, radiation, self-field, collisions, measurement, and empirical applicability are excluded.

Statement

Use the charged test-body quantities of Charged and spinning test-body quantities on the flat Minkowski specialization, with constant mass m>0 in kilograms and constant charge q in coulombs. In a named inertial SI chart write x0=ct, t∈I:=R, and x=(x1,x2,x3)∈Ω:=R3∖{0}, with r:=∣x∣>0; the fixed point source of charge Q in coulombs is at x=0, which is excluded from the spacetime domain O:=I×Ω. The prescribed static scalar potential ϕ:Ω×I→R, electric field E:Ω×I→R3 and magnetic field B:Ω×I→R3 are C∞ on that domain and are

ϕ(x,t)=Q4πε0r,E(x,t)=Qx4πε0r3,B(x,t)=0.

Here ε0>0 is the framework SI parameter of Framework-local SI units, the vacuum constants and the exact/measured status of their values, ϕ has units volts, E volts per metre, and B teslas. The external four-potential on O has components A0=−ϕ/c, Ai=0 in the x0=ct convention, and the electromagnetic two-form convention is that of The electromagnetic two-form, its observer decomposition and the four-current. Thus Ei=−∂xiϕ and F0i=−Ei/c on O; A is C∞ there and no field value or smoothness across x=0 is asserted. Put κ:=qQ/(4πε0)>0, which has units joule metres.

The body's worldline is the C2 future-timelike curve z:Iz→O of Charged and spinning test-body quantities, with Iz an open proper-time interval and tangent U=dz/dτ satisfying g(U,U)=−c2; its four-momentum is P=mU.

Under the adopted fixed-endpoint charged-particle action and its proved Lorentz-force consequence, assume ACω for the canonical tangent-bundle smooth structure as required by those suppliers. In the flat specialization also adopt the massive-particle momentum model of Adopted massive-particle momentum, observer measurement and isolated-collision conservation. For v:=dx/dt one has ∣v∣<c and γ:=(1−∣v∣2/c2)−1/2. Then the canonical spatial momentum equals the kinetic momentum p=mγv (in kilograms metres per second), and the coordinate-time Hamiltonian is

H(x,p)=m2c4+c2∣p∣2+κr.

Thus the trajectories are those of Repulsive relativistic Coulomb Hamiltonian phase system, with x∈Ω, p∈R3, and coordinate time t∈I. For asymptotic scattering data, use the unique maximal coordinate-time extension of the given local phase trajectory on the noncolliding scattering branch of that phase system. Incoming and outgoing asymptotic vectors below belong to this extension; a finite interval restriction need not itself contain either asymptotic tail. Let W:=H(x,p)>mc2 be its conserved energy in joules and let J:=∣x×p∣>κ/c be the conserved angular-momentum magnitude in kilograms metres squared per second. The proposition Exact repulsive relativistic Coulomb scattering branch gives the incoming and outgoing asymptotic velocity vectors and defines their principal Euclidean angle θ∈(0,π) as π−2Δ; the limiting momentum vectors have the same directions because p=mγv with γ>0. Define

A=W2−m2c4c2,d=Wκc2,C=J2−κ2c2,

Here A is the positive scalar denoted A in Exact repulsive relativistic Coulomb scattering branch. Its exact angle between incoming and outgoing momenta is

θ=π−2JCarctan⁡(CAd)∈(0,π).

Here A has units of squared momentum, d has units of A times length, and C has units of squared angular momentum, so CA/d and θ are dimensionless. This is a model deduction, not a measured scattering law. The inequality J>κ/c is part of the result's domain; no conclusion is made for J≤κ/c.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A fixed source, a single test body, qQ>0, the stated SI potential and field convention, the adopted external-charge action, and a scattering state with W>mc2 and J>κ/c.

[A1]

The local charged-body model adopts stationary points of −mc∫−g(z′,z′)dλ+q∫A(z′)dλ on finite fixed-endpoint timelike segments; A is prescribed, and no self-field, recoil or radiation reaction is included (Charged and spinning test-body quantities, External-field charged-particle action).

[A2]

Assume exactly the axiom of countable choice ACω for the canonical tangent-bundle smooth structure, as required by the inspected local-IVP and action-variation suppliers (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

[A3]

In the flat specialization, adopt the massive-particle momentum model that supplies constant positive mass and P=mU (Adopted massive-particle momentum, observer measurement and isolated-collision conservation).

[F1]

Under [A2] and [A3], in a named flat inertial SI chart the charged mass-shell theorem gives dp/dt=q(E+v×B), with kinetic momentum p=mγv (Charged test-body mass shell and laboratory work).

[F2]

The SI convention is F0i=−Ei/c and F=dA; with A0=−ϕ/c and Ai=0, it gives Ei=−∂iϕ (The electromagnetic two-form, its observer decomposition and the four-current, Framework-local SI units, the vacuum constants and the exact/measured status of their values).

[F3]

The mathematical phase system has Hamiltonian m2c4+c2∣p∣2+κ/r; for W>mc2 and J>κ/c the exact deflection of its unique maximal noncolliding scattering branch is π−2(J/C)arctan⁡(CA/d) with A=(W2−m2c4)/c2 (Repulsive relativistic Coulomb Hamiltonian phase system, Exact repulsive relativistic Coulomb scattering branch).

[F5]

The external-charge action and stationarity are invariant when a fixed admissible C2 orientation-preserving parameter diffeomorphism acts on the entire fixed-endpoint variation family (Stationary charged action and Lorentz force).

Proof

technique · specialize the adopted external action to the static Coulomb potential, compute its canonical Hamiltonian, identify the resulting ODE with the proved mathematical phase system, and apply its exact scattering proposition
1.1givenA1A2F4F5

On any finite proper-time segment z:[a,b]→O of the adopted C2 future-timelike worldline, set T(τ)=x0(z(τ))/c. Then T is C2 and T′=U0/c>0 in the future-oriented inertial chart. By [F4], T is strictly increasing and has local C1 inverses; injectivity makes them agree to give its inverse ψ:[T(a),T(b)]→[a,b]. Its derivative is ψ′=1/(T′∘ψ)>0, and the chain and reciprocal rules give ψ′′=−(T′′∘ψ)/(T′∘ψ)3, which is continuous. The same local argument extends to the endpoints using the worldline on a neighborhood of the segment (or the one-sided C2 restrictions). Thus ψ is an admissible C2 orientation-preserving diffeomorphism in [A1]. The action-equivalence supplier proves invariance of the action and stationarity under this fixed parameter change applied to the entire variation family. Coordinate-time spatial variations with fixed endpoint positions, represented by (ct,xϵ(t)), are among its admissible variations: on a compact segment ∣v∣<c has a positive margin, so sufficiently small C2 variations remain future timelike, and composing with the fixed T transports them to the original parameter interval with endpoints fixed.

2.1step 1.1A1A2A3F1F2F3algebra

In the inertial chart, dx0/dt=c and ∣dx/dt∣=∣v∣. The action density from [A1] is therefore L(x,v)=−mc21−∣v∣2/c2+qA0c=−mc21−∣v∣2/c2−qϕ(r). Its spatial canonical momentum is ∂L/∂v=mγv; because Ai=0, it is also the kinetic momentum in [F1]. The Legendre expression p⋅v−L equals γmc2+qϕ=m2c4+c2∣p∣2+qQ/(4πε0r). With κ=qQ/(4πε0)>0, this is precisely the Hamiltonian in [F3].

3.1step 2.1A2A3F1F2F3algebra

From [F2], E=−∇ϕ=Qx/(4πε0r3). Since B=0, [F1] gives p˙=qE=κx/r3. The Hamiltonian derivative gives x˙=c2p/m2c4+c2∣p∣2. These are exactly the two phase equations of [F3], so each local physical solution in the prescribed model is a trajectory of that mathematical system.

4.1step 3.1A1A2A3F3given

Use the unique maximal coordinate-time extension of the local phase trajectory identified in step 3.1. On the stipulated noncolliding scattering branch, for W>mc2 and J>κ/c, the exact repulsive scattering proposition [F3] supplies that global extension and its incoming and outgoing asymptotic data, impact parameter and deflection formula, with A,d,C as defined in the statement. A finite physical segment is a restriction of that phase trajectory; the asymptotic angle is assigned to its extension, not to the finite segment alone. The conclusion remains conditional on [A1], [A2], and [A3] and the fixed-source idealization.

5.1step 4.1A1A2A3given∎

The exact angle is therefore a model prediction for the stated branch. The derivation makes no claim for J≤κ/c, for source recoil or radiation, or for any experimental result.

Remarks

  • The Coulomb source is an external fixed source, not a second dynamical body. The calculation does not conserve source-plus-particle momentum because the source's response is outside the model.
  • Landau and Lifshitz §39 gives the exact orbit relation and scattering angle in Gaussian units. The present argument states its own SI conversion through κ=qQ/(4πε0) and does not import a Gaussian-unit formula without conversion.
  • Boyer's independent paper treats an attractive −α/r potential and displays its exact orbit families. The present item uses the opposite, repulsive sign and proves that branch directly; Boyer's attractive trajectories are not imported as a proof of the repulsive formula.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

None yet.

Sources