Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-generatedProof: AI-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.

The stationary maximal vacuum divergence identity with the article sign

Statement

On a smooth maximal spacelike hypersurface in a vacuum spacetime (here meaning Ric⁡(g)=0), decompose the stationary Killing field as T=Nn+X, use k(U,V)=−g(∇Un,V), and write D for the Levi–Civita connection of the induced Riemannian metric h. Spatial indices range from 1 to 3, and are raised and lowered with h. Then DiXj+DjXi=2Nkij,Dikij=0,Di(kijXj)=N∣k∣h2. Here ∣k∣h2=hiahjbkijkab. These are conditional local identities on an already supplied maximal hypersurface; they do not construct it.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

The hypersurface data fix n,h,k,N,X, maximality tr⁡hk=0, and the stationary data fix the ambient metric-compatible connection and the local-flow Killing condition. Spacelike sections, maximality and lapse–shift data Stationary Lorentzian data and tensor conventions

[F2]

For this Lorentzian ambient metric, Proof 1.1 of the constraint supplier proves DUV=(∇UV)⊤, hence h(DUV,W)=g(∇UV,W) for tangent fields. Its Statement (c) gives G(n,Y)=(div⁡hK)(Y)−DYtr⁡hK, where K(U,V)=g(∇Un,V)=−k(U,V) is symmetric. Gauss-Codazzi decomposition in Gaussian normal coordinates and the constraint equations in terms of the induced metric and second fundamental form

[F3]

Clause (a) characterizes LTg=0 by the covariant Killing equation g(∇UT,V)+g(∇VT,U)=0. Its smooth oriented time-oriented Lorentzian four-dimensional hypotheses are supplied by the stationary data. Killing fields and conserved currents, and on-shell conservation of the Hilbert stress-energy tensor Stationary Lorentzian data and tensor conventions

[F4]

On TΣ and its dual use the product tensor connection induced by D. It differentiates tensor products by the Leibniz rule and commutes with contractions and permutations. Since D is h-compatible, Dh=0; differentiating hiahaj=δij with these rules also gives Dh−1=0. Product connection on tensor and hom bundles Induced connections commute with contraction and permutation Spacelike sections, maximality and lapse–shift data

[F5]

For the Riemannian metric h, the divergence of a smooth vector field Y is the trace DiYi. Gradient hessian and divergence connection formulas

[F6]

The scalar curvature is Scal⁡g=gabRic⁡ab and the Einstein tensor is G=Ric⁡−12Scal⁡gg. These are geometric tensor definitions, independent of a physical field-equation postulate. The Riemann curvature operator and the derived Ricci, scalar and Einstein tensors

Proof

Given: The smooth stationary Lorentzian data, the supplied maximal spacelike hypersurface, and the geometric vacuum hypothesis Ric⁡(g)=0, with the conventions and interfaces in [F1]–[F6].

Goal: Derive the three local identities with the displayed sign.

1.1givenF1F2F4

Apply the tangential projection identity in [F2] to the tangent shift X. It gives g(∇UX,V)=h(DUX,V) for tangent U,V. Metric compatibility and the dual/product connection in [F4] identify the right side in components with DiXj. The projection identity is valid for a spacelike hypersurface in a Lorentzian manifold; no Riemannian ambient-metric hypothesis is used.

1.2givenF1F2F4F6

The hypothesis Ric⁡(g)=0 implies Scal⁡g=0 and G=0 by [F6]. In [F2], K=−k and maximality give tr⁡hK=0, so its mixed normal projection yields div⁡hK=0. Hence hiaDikaj=0. Raising j and commuting the inverse metric with D using [F4] gives exactly Dikij=0.

2.1givenF1F2F3step 1.1

By [F3], 0=g(∇UT,V)+g(∇VT,U). Substitute T=Nn+X. The terms U(N)g(n,V) and V(N)g(n,U) vanish by normal orthogonality, and the two normal-derivative terms sum to −2Nk(U,V), using the symmetry in [F2]. Step 1.1 converts the remaining terms to h(DUX,V)+h(DVX,U). Thus DiXj+DjXi=2Nkij.

3.1F2F4F5step 2.1step 1.2algebra∎

Set Yi=kijXj. By [F5] its divergence is DiYi. The tensor product and contraction rules of [F4] give DiYi=(Dikij)Xj+kijDiXj. Step 1.2 eliminates the first term. Symmetry of k and step 2.1 give kijDiXj=12kij(DiXj+DjXi)=Nkijkij=N∣k∣h2. This proves the final identity. Reversing the second fundamental form convention reverses the displayed divergence sign but leaves its zero-integral implication unchanged.

Depends on

Used by · 1

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Each result is drawn at its shortest distance from this item. Arrows run from prerequisites to the items that use them; this item has a heavier outline. External source nodes link directly to the cited text. The view shows up to two dependency steps; open a prerequisite to continue.