VibeMathedMath problems solved with AI

Exact order-three ambiguity of the Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton coupling a2a^2 in metric jets, and its fourth-order collapse

Is the EMD coupling square a2a^2 a function of the metric three-jet on an explicit active, non-null, simple-spectrum family of truncated Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton data, and can one more derivative recover it? Proved: no function of the common metric three-jet returns a2a^2 - the order-three ambiguity is exactly a free affine shear orbit (R\mathbb{R}) mixing B=asin2θB=a\sin 2\theta with the phase gradient - while the fourth-order quotient recovers a2=A2+B2a^2=A^2+B^2, with equality fiber exactly a=±ba=\pm b (Z2\mathbb{Z}_2). In particular Kaluza's a=3a=\sqrt{3} and the control a=1a=1 collide through metric order three.

Result
Proved(see note)
Status
Resolved
AI contribution
AI co-developed
Method
Construction
Field
Mathematical relativity - Rainich geometrization, Kaluza-Klein
Posed by
This work (2026); lineage: Rainich 1925, Misner-Wheeler 1957
Year posed
2026
Years open
0y
Solved
2026-08-14
Model
GPT 5.6 Sol, Fable
Vendor
OpenAI, Anthropic
Collaborators
James Kehoe
Verification
Lean-checked, statement unaudited
Publication
Announced
Significance
3 / 100
Disclosed cost
Wikipedia
No dedicated article

What was actually shown

Finite-jet theorems about compiled truncated EMD equation certificates: the exact shear-orbit fiber classification of the complete first seed channels, an explicit collision family with one metric three-jet realized by an actual cubic metric germ (genuine Frechet Ricci value and first derivative), the compiled impossibility theorem, and the fourth-order recovery with equality fiber a=±ba=\pm b. Not settled here: promotion to analytic EMD solution germs (separate written argument pending specialist audit, in the parent repository), chart covariance beyond the fixed presentation, density of the active locus, degenerate branches, and any sufficiency of a2=3a^2=3 for a Kaluza uplift.

What the AI did

Proposed and proved the theorems, wrote the Lean 4 formalization and the manuscript under human direction, with repeated adversarial audit cycles; the human author set scope, claim boundaries, and verification gates.

Verification

Source-audited by this site on 17 August 2026: the repository was cloned at v0.1.0 and all 77 Lean files scanned with comments stripped - zero sorry, zero admit, zero axiom declarations, zero native_decide, toolchain pinned at v4.32.1 with Mathlib. Not compiled here (the repo's CI is claimed to). Lean-checked rather than Lean-verified per this site's standing split: the statements' correspondence to the informal claims has not been independently audited, and the same pipeline produced both the proofs and the formalization. No human peer review.

Source

Submitted by PluckyCobra527 on

Changelog4 changes
  • Rasmus Lindahlset significanceNote to A precisely posed and cleanly resolved identifiability question, but posed by this work it…
  • Rasmus Lindahlapproved this entry
  • Rasmus Lindahlchanged verificationNote from All claims compile in Lean 4 over Mathlib v4.32.1 (pinned toolchain and manifest); no sorr… to Source-audited by this site on 17 August 2026: the repository was cloned at v0.1.0 and all…, also significance
  • PluckyCobra527submitted this entry

Discussion