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.

Constructed timelike smear and massless accelerated spectrum

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

This page constructs the massless scalar shell restriction along a smooth future timelike curve by proving rapid decay of its on-shell test amplitude. It defines the curve-smeared finite-particle field, its Segal closure, and its tested covariance without assuming a point field. For the proper-time hyperbola it derives the damped covariance boundary directly. Its accelerated spectrum and detailed balance are conditional on the actual batch-74 draft single-pole contour item and its draft exponential-current prerequisite. Both carriers are present in the batch-74 manifest, and their current run Step-1 records report ready; this is authoring-readiness evidence, not proof acceptance. The local proof uses the contour item's length-coordinate interface with α=a/c2 and u=cs; it does not treat either draft label as proof acceptance. The second lemma proves a quantitative finite-switch coefficient bound and solves a separately defined two-state Markov model. Neither result is an all-order detector-probability theorem or an empirical observation.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Constructed timelike smear and massless accelerated spectrum

Statement

Assume Countable Choice The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω). Use the affine Minkowski space, metric η=diag⁡(−1,1,1,1), shell pairing p∘x=p0x0−p⋅x, and massless one-particle space of Scalar future mass shell, invariant measure and test restriction. Thus x0,x have length units, k has inverse-length units, the omitted shell apex k=0 has measure zero, and dν0(k)=d3k(2π)32∣k∣,H0=L2(R3∖{0},dν0;C). Let I⊆R be a nonempty open proper-time interval, with τ in seconds, and let γ=(γ0,γ)∈C∞(I,R4) satisfy η(γ˙(τ),γ˙(τ))=−c2,γ˙0(τ)>∣γ˙(τ)∣ for all τ∈I, where c>0 is in metres per second. This defines a future-directed timelike curve parametrized by proper seconds. For f∈Cc∞(I;C) define its curve-smearing amplitude by Kγf(k)=∫If(τ)ei(∣k∣γ0(τ)−k⋅γ(τ)) dτ. Then Kγf∈H0, and on every fixed compact support set the map f↦Kγf is continuous in the test-function topology. If f has units metres per second, then Kγf has units metres and its H0 norm is dimensionless. For real f, define the actual finite-particle-domain field Φγ(f)=a(Kγf)+a†(Kγf) using the bosonic Fock space and creation/annihilation conventions of Schwartz/distribution spaces and Hilbert Fock conventions. It is symmetric on the finite-particle domain and has the self-adjoint Segal closure supplied by Self-adjoint Segal fields and explicit Weyl unitaries. Its vacuum covariance on real compact tests is the well-defined pairing ⟨Kγf,Kγg⟩2. This construction is an additional temporal smearing of the massless shell; it does not define a point field or an interaction.

Use the batch-74 draft Positive chiral current and exponential test-coordinate model's stated conventions sinh⁡z=(ez−e−z)/2, cosh⁡z=(ez+e−z)/2, and csch⁡z=1/sinh⁡z where the denominator is nonzero; that item also states sinh⁡′=cosh⁡ and cosh⁡′=sinh⁡. Define coth⁡z:=cosh⁡z/sinh⁡z where sinh⁡z≠0. These formulas give cosh⁡2z−sinh⁡2z=1 and hence (coth⁡z)′=−csch⁡2z.

For a>0 in metres per second squared, put ℓ=c2/a and define the curve γa:R→R4 by γa(τ)=(ℓsinh⁡(aτ/c),ℓcosh⁡(aτ/c),0,0). For this curve, its four-acceleration is the second derivative γ¨a(τ) with respect to the proper-second parameter τ; define its proper-acceleration magnitude by αa(τ):=η(γ¨a(τ),γ¨a(τ)). We call γa uniformly accelerated when αa is constant; the calculation below gives αa(τ)=a for every τ∈R. The restriction of the massless Minkowski-vacuum covariance constructed above is stationary in proper time, meaning its two-time covariance depends on (τ,τ′) only through s=τ−τ′, and, in the distributional boundary-value sense on the real line, is Ca(s)=−a216π2c4 csch⁡2 ⁣(a(s−i0)2c). The displayed expression means the limit of the smooth damped shell pairings against compact smooth tests; no product or pullback of point-field distributions is assumed. With the angular-frequency convention Sa(ν)=F−Ca(ν),F−C(ν)=∫Re−iνsC(s) ds interpreted distributionally, the local conclusion about the spectrum is conditional on the current batch-74 draft suppliers Single-pole thermal contour and exact detailed balance and its prerequisite Positive chiral current and exponential test-coordinate model. Their carriers exist in the batch-74 manifest, and both items have status draft. The current run's Step-1 records report ready for both items; this is authoring-readiness evidence, not proof acceptance. The contour item's actual statement uses a length coordinate and an inverse-length parameter (renamed from its κ to α here); the proof below uses α=a/c2 and u=cs, for which the covariance obeys Ca(s)=π−1Cα(cs). Under the contour item's exact conditional Fourier formula and this rescaling, Sa(ν)=ν2πc2(e2πcν/a−1),Sa(0)=a4π2c3,Sa(−ν)=e2πcν/aSa(ν)(ν>0). The continuous value at zero is the removable limit. ν has units seconds−1 and Sa has units seconds per square metre; the spectral claim remains conditional until both draft suppliers are accepted.

For comparison, on the inertial curve γ0(τ)=(cτ,0,0,0) the same construction gives C0(s)=−14π2c2(s−i0)2,S0(ν)=max⁡(−ν,0)2πc2. These are mathematical covariance and Fourier-transform statements in the specified representation. They do not assert a measured spectrum or a detector transition probability.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice; the massless future-shell measure and phase; the second-variable-linear bosonic Fock convention; an open proper-time interval I and a smooth future unit-timelike curve γ as stated. Coordinates have metres, τ seconds, k inverse metres, c metres per second, a metres per second squared, and all shell phases are dimensionless.

[A1]

Countable Choice is the explicit choice strength used by the cited Fock and Segal-field constructions. The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)

[F1]

The massless shell has p0=∣k∣, pairing p∘x=∣k∣x0−k⋅x, and measure d3k/((2π)32∣k∣); the apex is omitted and has measure zero. Scalar future mass shell, invariant measure and test restriction

[F2]

Cc∞(I;C) consists of smooth complex tests whose support is a compact subset of the open interval I. A tempered distribution is a continuous bilinear functional on Schwartz space; test functions are not conjugated in that pairing. Test function space d of an open set Tempered distribution

[F3]

The Hilbert pairing is conjugate-linear in its first entry and linear in its second; creation is linear, annihilation conjugate-linear, both preserve the finite-particle subspace, and the real Segal field is (a†(h)+a(h))/2‾ there. Schwartz/distribution spaces and Hilbert Fock conventions

[F4]

For real spacetime Schwartz tests the free scalar field has the formula a(K0f)+a†(K0f) and its vacuum covariance is the one-particle pairing. This fixes the scalar-field normalization used when defining the additional curve-smearing construction; it does not itself assert that a curve restriction exists. Smeared free scalar field and its Poincare representation

[F5]

For every h in the separable one-particle space the Segal field on the finite-particle domain is essentially self-adjoint, and the real Weyl group has that closure as generator. Self-adjoint Segal fields and explicit Weyl unitaries

[F6]

The massless one-particle space is separable, so it meets the explicit hypothesis of [F5]. Density of Schwartz test restrictions in the scalar shell space

[F7]

Dominated convergence applies to the radial shell norm and to the e−ϵ∣k∣ damping limit. Dominated convergence

[F8]

The Fourier transform on tempered distributions is defined by bilinear transposition of the negative-sign 2π Schwartz transform. Replacing ξ by ν/(2π) gives the angular-frequency kernel e−iνs used here; no conjugation is introduced. Fourier transform of a tempered distribution Fourier transform on tempered distributions is well defined and continuous

[F9]

Absolute Fubini applies to the exponentially damped shell integral paired with two compact tests. Fubini's theorem for L^1 functions on a sigma-finite product

[F10]

The definition gives a(h)Ω=0 and a†(h)Ω=h in the one-particle sector; the actual bosonic maps preserve the finite-particle domain and are mutual adjoints there. Schwartz/distribution spaces and Hilbert Fock conventions Bosonic and fermionic Fock operators with exact domains

[F11]

For f^(ξ)=∫f(s)e−2πisξ ds, Schwartz inversion is f(s)=∫f^(ξ)e2πisξ dξ; setting ν=2πξ gives the reciprocal 1/(2π) in the angular-frequency inverse. Fourier inversion on Schwartz space

[F12]

The Hilbert pairing satisfies Cauchy–Schwarz, ∣⟨u,v⟩2∣≤∥u∥2∥v∥2. Cauchy–Schwarz: ∣⟨u,v⟩∣≤∥u∥∥v∥, with equality exactly for linearly dependent vectors

[F13]

The test space D(I)=Cc∞(I) has the locally convex LF topology determined by its fixed-support stages DK(I), whose seminorms are pm(f)=max⁡0≤j≤msup⁡τ∈K∣f(j)(τ)∣. A linear map from D(I) to a locally convex space is continuous if its restriction to every DK(I) is continuous. Test function topology Test function lf topology universal property

[L1]

Draft supplier, not an accepted proof input: the current batch-74 item Single-pole thermal contour and exact detailed balance assumes its parameter κ>0 with units of inverse length. Renaming that parameter to α and its length variable s to u, it states Cα(u)=−α2(16π)−1csch⁡2(α(u−i0)/2) and Sα(ω)=ω/[2(e2πω/α−1)], Sα(0)=α/(4π), with Sα(−ω)=e2πω/αSα(ω) for ω>0. Its declared prerequisite Positive chiral current and exponential test-coordinate model is also a current batch-74 draft. Both carriers are present, and their current run Step-1 records report ready. Those records provide authoring-readiness evidence, not proof acceptance. We use the contour item's actual statement conditionally, after the explicit positive coordinate and amplitude rescaling in the last proof step; neither draft label is treated as proof acceptance.

Proof

1.1A1F1F2givenconstruct

Fix a compact set K⋐I containing supp⁡f and let d=min⁡τ∈K(γ˙0−∣γ˙∣)>0. For k=rn, r>0, ∣n∣=1, the phase is rϕn(τ) with ϕn′=γ˙0−n⋅γ˙≥d. All derivatives of 1/ϕn′ are uniformly bounded on K×S2. Since eirϕ=(irϕ′)−1∂τeirϕ, repeated integration by parts gives ∣Kγf(rn)∣≤CNr−N for every N and r≥1, with CN bounded by finitely many test-function seminorms on K. Boundary terms vanish because f is compactly supported. For 0<r≤1, ∣Kγf(rn)∣≤∥f∥L1(K).

1.2givenalgebra

Put κ=a/c and ℓ=c2/a. Direct differentiation gives γ˙a=(ccosh⁡(κτ),csinh⁡(κτ),0,0), η(γ˙a,γ˙a)=−c2, and γ¨a=(asinh⁡(κτ),acosh⁡(κτ),0,0), η(γ¨a,γ¨a)=a2. Hence the curve is future unit timelike and the defined proper-acceleration magnitude satisfies αa(τ)=a for every τ. With s=τ−τ′ and v=(τ+τ′)/2, the differences satisfy X+Y=2ℓeκvsinh⁡(κs/2),X−Y=2ℓe−κvsinh⁡(κs/2), where Y=Δx1. Therefore Y2−X2=−4ℓ2sinh⁡2(κs/2), and the regulated denominator factors exactly as Y2+(ϵ+iX)2=(Y−X+iϵ)(Y+X−iϵ).

2.1F1F13step 1.1algebra

In polar coordinates dν0=r dr dΩ/(2(2π)3). The low-frequency bound makes ∫01r∣Kγf∣2dr finite; the estimate of 1.1 with, for example, N=2 makes ∫1∞r∣Kγf∣2dr finite, uniformly in n. The same estimates bound the norm by finitely many seminorms of f on K, so Kγ∣DK(I) is continuous for each compact K⋐I and Kγf∈H0. Since Kγ is complex-linear, [F13] gives its continuity from the LF test-function topology on D(I) to the norm topology of H0. The Hilbert-space vector is therefore defined before it is used in a field expression.

3.1A1F2F3F4F5F6F10step 2.1algebra

The creation and annihilation formulas in [F2] define Φγ(f) on the finite-particle domain because Kγf∈H0. For real f, it equals 2 times the Segal field with vector Kγf on that domain. Separability [F6] meets the hypothesis of [F5], which gives its self-adjoint closure. Mutual adjointness [F10] makes the finite-domain field symmetric. The vacuum is annihilated by a(Kγf) by [F10]. Therefore Φγ(g)Ω=a†(Kγg)Ω and symmetry of Φγ(f) gives ⟨Ω,Φγ(f)Φγ(g)Ω⟩2=⟨Kγf,Kγg⟩2. This defines only the tested field and makes no point-field assumption.

3.2F1F2F7F9F12step 2.1given

For ϵ>0 insert e−ϵr in the shell integral. With X=Δx0 and R=∣Δx∣, absolute convergence permits angular integration and Fubini [F9]: Wϵ(X,R)=14π2R∫0∞e−(ϵ+iX)rsin⁡(rR) dr=14π2(R2+(ϵ+iX)2). The value at R=0 is the continuous limit. The integral identity follows by writing the sine as two exponentials and integrating each, since Re⁡(ϵ+iX)>0. For compact real tests f,g, the shell-paired expression converges to ⟨Kγf,Kγg⟩2: e−ϵr/2Kγf→Kγf in H0 by [F7], and Cauchy–Schwarz [F12] passes the inner products to the limit. Thus the damped kernel is an actual regulator for the constructed covariance, not a formal substitution of a worldline into a point field.

4.1F1F2step 3.2step 1.2algebra

For compact real tests f,g, the linear change v=(τ+τ′)/2, s=τ−τ′ has Jacobian of absolute value one and takes f(τ)g(τ′) to a compact smooth test φ(v,s). On the compact average-time projection of its support, write A(v)=2ℓe−κv>0 and B(v)=2ℓeκv>0. The factors Y−X+iϵ and Y+X−iϵ are respectively −A(v)(x−iϵ/A(v)) and B(v)(x−iϵ/B(v)), where x=sinh⁡(κs/2). For positive α,β the identity 1(x−iαϵ)(x−iβϵ)=∫01dt(x−i((1−t)α+tβ)ϵ)2 follows by integrating the derivative of [x−i((1−t)α+tβ)ϵ]−1 in t and dividing by i(β−α)ϵ when α≠β; for α=β both sides agree directly. It shows that both dampings have the same boundary. To justify that boundary, for a compact smooth test ψ choose an even compact smooth χ equal to one near zero and write ψ(x)=ψ(0)χ(x)+xρ(x), where ρ is smooth and compactly supported. The constant term satisfies ∫χ(x)x−iλϵ dx=iλϵ∫χ(x)x2+(λϵ)2 dx⟶iπ for each λ>0, since its odd real part integrates to zero. The other term is xρ(x)/(x−iλϵ)=ρ(x)+iλϵρ(x)/(x−iλϵ); the last integral is O(ϵ∣log⁡ϵ∣) uniformly for λ in a compact positive interval. Let δ0 denote evaluation at zero, ⟨δ0,ψ⟩=ψ(0), and define the distributional derivative by ⟨T′,ψ⟩=−⟨T,ψ′⟩ for compact smooth tests ψ, so ⟨δ0′,ψ⟩=−ψ′(0). Thus (x−i0)−1=PV⁡(1/x)+iπδ0, where PV⁡(1/x) acts by lim⁡δ↓0∫∣x∣>δψ(x)/x dx. Differentiating this distributional identity gives (x−i0)−2=Pf⁡(1/x2)−iπδ0′ and ⟨Pf⁡(1/x2),ψ⟩=lim⁡δ↓0(∫∣x∣>δψ(x)x2 dx−2ψ(0)δ). Integration by parts on ∣x∣>δ identifies this finite part with −(PV⁡(1/x))′. The bounds are uniform when the positive damping coefficient ranges in a compact subinterval of (0,∞), as it does for v in a compact set. To identify the pullback with the usual s−i0 boundary, note that sinh⁡(bs−iϵb)=sinh⁡(bs)−iϵbcosh⁡(bs)+O(ϵ2). More generally, for a positive smooth regulator λ(v,x), Taylor expand λ=λ0(v)+λ1(v)x+x2r(v,x). The linear part factors as x−iϵ(λ0+λ1x)=(1−iϵλ1)(x−iϵλ01−iϵλ1). Its pole has positive imaginary part comparable to ϵ and real displacement O(ϵ2), so the preceding test-subtraction calculation gives the same boundary. The quadratic remainder changes the inverse square by at most Cϵx2/(x2+ϵ2)3/2 on a small interval; its integral is O(ϵ∣log⁡ϵ∣). Thus the smooth positive regulator, including the one induced by sinh⁡(b(s−iϵ)), has the same boundary as the constant positive regulator. The change x=sinh⁡(κs/2) is orientation-preserving with positive derivative. Consequently the test-paired limit of step 3.2 is Ca(s)=−116π2ℓ2csch⁡2 ⁣(κ(s−i0)2)=−a216π2c4csch⁡2 ⁣(a(s−i0)2c). Thus ⟨Kγaf,Kγag⟩2 equals ⟨Ca(s),∫f(t)g(t−s) dt⟩. This proves stationarity and the stated covariance boundary from ordinary regulated shell pairings. To verify temperedness explicitly, set q=lim⁡ϵ↓0coth⁡(κ(s−iϵ)/2) in the distribution sense and r(s)=coth⁡(κs/2)−2/(κs) for s≠0. The Taylor expansion of coth⁡ at zero extends r smoothly there, and r′(s)=−(κ/2)csch⁡2(κs/2)+2/(κs2) is bounded: its apparent singularity cancels at zero, and both terms are bounded at infinity. Since 1/(s−i0)=PV⁡(1/s)+iπδ0, the decomposition is q=(2/κ)PV⁡(1/s)+r+(2πi/κ)δ0. By the derivative definition and qϵ→q on compact smooth tests, qϵ′→q′. Direct differentiation of qϵ(s)=coth⁡(κ(s−iϵ)/2) then gives Ca=(a2/(8π2c4κ))q′. For m,n≥0 set pm,n(φ)=sup⁡s(1+s2)m/2∣φ(n)(s)∣, a Schwartz seminorm. For φ∈S(R), the symmetric principal-value formula gives ∣⟨PV⁡(1/s),φ′⟩∣≤2p0,2(φ)+Cp2,1(φ), because subtracting φ′(0) on ∣s∣<1 bounds the local integral by 2sup⁡∣φ′′∣, while the ∣s∣≥1 integral is bounded by p2,1∫∣s∣≥1[∣s∣(1+s2)]−1ds. Also ∣∫r′(s)φ(s)ds∣≤Cp2,0(φ) and ∣⟨δ0′,φ⟩∣≤p0,1(φ). Hence ∣⟨Ca,φ⟩∣≤Ca,c(p0,2(φ)+p2,1(φ)+p2,0(φ)+p0,1(φ)), a finite Schwartz-seminorm bound. By [F2], Ca∈S′(R), as required for its subsequent Fourier transform.

4.2F1F2F8F9F11step 3.2algebra

On the inertial curve, direct radial integration gives W0,ϵ(s)=14π2∫0∞re−(ϵ+ics)r dr=14π2(ϵ+ics)2. Its boundary is C0(s)=−1/(4π2c2(s−i0)2). Reparameterizing the massless shell by ω=cr gives C0(s)=(4π2c2)−1∫0∞ωe−iωsdω as a tempered boundary distribution. Fourier transformation with e−iνs then yields S0(ν)=max⁡(−ν,0)/(2πc2), including continuous value zero at ν=0. Specifically, the inverse-Fourier identity from [F11], after ν=2πξ, gives F−(e−iωs)(ν)=2πδ0(ν+ω); integrating this identity against ω1ω>0/(4π2c2) yields the displayed regular density. Pairing first with a Schwartz test makes the ω integral absolutely convergent by rapid decay, so the interchange with the shell integral is justified.

5.1F8L1step 4.1algebra∎

Let α=a/c2>0, which has units of inverse length, and use the supplier's length coordinate u=cs. The supplier boundary definition in [L1] and the covariance in step 4.1 give Ca(s)=π−1Cα(cs) as tempered distributions: their smooth kernels have the same hyperbolic argument and their coefficients differ by exactly 1/π; the scaling is positive, so it preserves the lower-boundary orientation. By the bilinear transposed Fourier convention [F8], for each φ∈S(R) the dual pairing gives ⟨F−,s[Cα(c ⋅)],φ⟩=⟨Sα(ω),φ(cω)⟩=⟨c−1Sα(ν/c),φ⟩: indeed, φ^(u/c)=c φ(c ⋅)^(u) and the distribution pullback contributes c−1 under u=cs. Including the covariance factor π−1 therefore gives F−,s[π−1Cα(c ⋅)](ν)=π−1c−1Sα(ν/c). Now apply the exact conditional formula of draft supplier [L1]: Sa(ν)=1πcν/c2(e2π(ν/c)/α−1)=ν2πc2(e2πcν/a−1). Its zero limit is α/(4π2c)=a/(4π2c3), and its detailed-balance relation gives Sa(−ν)=e2πcν/aSa(ν) for ν>0. The spectral conclusion remains conditional until the two batch-74 draft suppliers are accepted; the covariance construction and inertial transform above are local arguments.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Exact defined Markov thermometer and switched coefficient bound

Statement

Assume Countable Choice The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω). Use the massless accelerated covariance Ca and its conditional spectrum Sa from Constructed timelike smear and massless accelerated spectrum, with a>0 in metres per second squared, c>0 in metres per second, and angular frequency in seconds−1. The conditional detailed-balance input is the actual Statement of the current batch-74 draft Single-pole thermal contour and exact detailed balance, reproduced in [L1] below. Its declared prerequisite Positive chiral current and exponential test-coordinate model is also a draft. The current run's Step-1 records report ready for both items; these are authoring-readiness records, not proof acceptance. The inertial pair (C0,S0) is the unconditioned comparison from Constructed timelike smear and massless accelerated spectrum. Both spectra are continuous and globally Lipschitz. The conventions are S=F−C with kernel e−iνs and C paired bilinearly with Schwartz tests.

Let h∈Cc∞(R;R) be nonzero, let the switching duration T>0 be measured in seconds, and put h^(z)=∫Rh(u)e−izu du,Kh=12π∥h∥22∫R∣z∣ ∣h^(z)∣2 dz. For either stationary pair (C,S)=(Ca,Sa) or (C0,S0) define the switched coefficient RT(C)(ν)=⟨C(s),e−iνs∫Rh(t/T)h((t−s)/T) dt⟩. Then Kh<∞ and, for every ν∈R, RT(C)(ν)=T22π∫RS(ω)∣h^(T(ν−ω))∣2 dω, so RT(C)(ν)≥0, and ∣RT(C)(ν)T∥h∥22−S(ν)∣≤Lip⁡(S)KhT,Lip⁡(S)=sup⁡x≠y∣S(x)−S(y)∣∣x−y∣<∞. This proves the leading switched coefficient limit and its explicit error; it is not a convergence theorem for an all-order detector transition probability or an exact infinite-time probability.

There is also the following separately defined two-state continuous-time Markov model. Choose an energy E>0 in joules, ℏ>0 in joule-seconds, kB>0 in joules per kelvin, and a coupling γd>0 in square metres per square second. For the accelerated spectrum set r+=γdSa(E/ℏ),r−=γdSa(−E/ℏ). These are positive rates in seconds−1. Let p(t) be the probability of the excited state in the two-state chain with ground-to-excited rate r+ and excited-to-ground rate r−, where model time t is measured in seconds. For every t≥0 and any initial probability p(0)∈[0,1], then p(t)=p∗+(p(0)−p∗)e−(r++r−)t,p∗=11+e2πcE/(aℏ). If the effective thermometer temperature Teff>0 is defined by p∗/(1−p∗)=e−E/(kBTeff), then Teff=ℏa2πckB. This is an exact result for the specified Markov chain. It is not a weak coupling or point-detector thermalization theorem.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice; the exact Fourier and tempered-distribution conventions; the two covariance/spectrum pairs in the preceding item; and positive a,c,E,ℏ,kB,γd with the units stated in the Statement, and an initial excited-state probability p(0)∈[0,1].

[A1]

Countable Choice is inherited from the Fourier suppliers and the draft thermal-contour supplier and its draft prerequisite. The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)

[A2]

In the separately specified two-state continuous-time Markov model, the state order is (g,e) and probability distributions are row vectors. Its generator, with Qij the transition rate from state i to state j for i≠j, is Q=(−r+r+r−−r−). The row distribution π(t)=(1−p(t),p(t)) evolves by the forward equation π′(t)=π(t)Q with π(0)=(1−p(0),p(0)); this fixes the probability evolution meant by the chain in the Statement.

[F1]

The accelerated covariance, its spectrum conditional on the contour supplier, and the inertial covariance and spectrum C0,S0 are stated in Constructed timelike smear and massless accelerated spectrum.

[L1]

Draft supplier, not an accepted proof input: the actual batch-74 Statement of Single-pole thermal contour and exact detailed balance assumes its parameter κ>0 with units of inverse length. Renaming that parameter to α and its length variable s to u, it gives Cα(u)=−α2(16π)−1csch⁡2(α(u−i0)/2) and Sα(ω)=ω/[2(e2πω/α−1)], Sα(0)=α/(4π), and Sα(−ω)=e2πω/αSα(ω) for ω>0. Its declared prerequisite Positive chiral current and exponential test-coordinate model is also present as a batch-74 draft. Both current run Step-1 records report ready; this is authoring-readiness evidence, not proof acceptance. All accelerated conclusions below remain conditional on those actual statements and proof review, not on their labels.

[F2]

A tempered distribution is a continuous bilinear functional on Schwartz space, and its Fourier transform is defined by bilinear transposition with the negative-sign 2π convention. Tempered distribution Fourier transform of a tempered distribution

[F3]

Fourier transformation is an automorphism on tempered distributions, with inverse RF; on Schwartz functions the normalization is the negative-sign 2π transform. Fourier transform on tempered distributions is well defined and continuous Fourier transform is a topological automorphism of tempered distributions Fourier inversion on Schwartz space

[F4]

The Fourier transform agrees with the integral transform on L1 and with the Plancherel extension on L2; that extension is a unitary isometry under the negative-sign 2π convention. Fourier transform agrees with l one and plancherel transforms Plancherel theorem

[F5]

Absolute Fubini applies to the compactly supported time integrals used to form the autocorrelation of h. Fubini's theorem for L^1 functions on a sigma-finite product

[F6]

Cc∞(R;R) consists of real smooth functions whose support is compact; these functions are Schwartz. Test function space d of an open set

Proof

1.1A1F1F2F3F5F6givenalgebra

Put gT(t)=h(t/T) and AT(s)=∫gT(t)gT(t−s) dt. Compact support [F6] and [F5] permit the change of variables and interchange of the two ordinary integrals. Setting u=t and v=t−s, and using the reality of h, gives the negative-sign angular transform AT^(λ)=∫R2gT(u)gT(v)e−iλ(u−v) du dv=gT^(λ)gT^(−λ)=∣gT^(λ)∣2=T2∣h^(Tλ)∣2. By [F2] and [F3], the inverse angular-frequency relation is C(s)=(2π)−1∫S(ω)eiωs dω in the distributional sense: it is the negative-sign 2π inverse after the change ξ=ω/(2π). Pairing with e−iνsAT(s) gives the absolutely convergent formula RT(C)(ν)=T22π∫RS(ω)∣h^(T(ν−ω))∣2 dω. Here S has at most linear growth and h^ is rapidly decreasing, so the integral is finite.

2.1A1F4F6step 1.1givenalgebra

Since h∈Cc∞ by [F6], each derivative of h^ is obtained by transforming a compactly supported smooth function (−iu)jh(u); repeated integration by parts shows every such derivative decreases faster than any inverse power. Hence ∫∣z∣∣h^(z)∣2dz<∞. Plancherel in [F4], followed by z=2πξ, yields ∫R∣h^(z)∣2dz=2π∥h∥22. Changing variables z=T(ν−ω) in 1.1 therefore gives RT(C)(ν)T∥h∥22=12π∥h∥22∫RS(ν−z/T)∣h^(z)∣2 dz.

3.1F1L1step 2.1algebra

For C=C0, [F1] gives S0(ν)=max⁡(−ν,0)/(2πc2). On ν≤0 this is linear with slope −1/(2πc2), on ν≥0 it is zero, and for x≤0≤y, ∣S0(x)−S0(y)∣=−x/(2πc2)≤(y−x)/(2πc2). Thus its global Lipschitz constant is 1/(2πc2). For C=Ca, the conditional formula in [F1] is smooth at zero by its Taylor expansion, has bounded derivative on every compact interval, has bounded derivative as ν→+∞ by exponential decay. Its derivative is Sa′(ν)=12πc2ebν−1−bνebν(ebν−1)2,b=2πc/a. The Taylor expansion at zero makes this derivative finite there; as ν→+∞ it decays exponentially times a polynomial, and as ν→−∞ it tends −1/(2πc2). Thus it is bounded on both tails and on compact intervals, so both spectra are globally Lipschitz (the accelerated assertion is conditional on [L1]). Subtract S(ν) in step 2.1 and use ∣S(ν−z/T)−S(ν)∣≤Lip⁡(S)∣z∣/T. The definition of Kh gives the stated error bound and its 1/T limit.

4.1A2F1L1algebra∎

The accelerated spectrum is positive: for ν>0 numerator and denominator in [F1] are positive, for ν<0 they are both negative, and the zero limit is positive. Thus r+,r−>0. By [A2], the second component of π′=πQ gives p′(t)=r+(1−p(t))−r−p(t)=r+−(r++r−)p(t). Solving this scalar linear ODE gives p(t)=p∗+(p(0)−p∗)e−(r++r−)t with p∗=r+/(r++r−). For t≥0 seconds, this is a convex combination of p(0) and p∗∈(0,1), so it remains a probability. Apply [L1] at ν=E/ℏ>0 to get r−/r+=Sa(−ν)/Sa(ν)=e2πcν/a, so p∗=1/(1+e2πcE/(aℏ)). The ratio p∗/(1−p∗) is therefore e−2πcE/(aℏ). Comparing with its defining Boltzmann form gives Teff=ℏa/(2πckB). This calculation concerns only the specified Markov model and its adopted rates.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

None yet.

Sources