Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

LINEAR-GREEDY HYBRID: Refute 1323->2744 #811

Open
teorth opened this issue Nov 9, 2024 · 8 comments · May be fixed by #1021
Open

LINEAR-GREEDY HYBRID: Refute 1323->2744 #811

teorth opened this issue Nov 9, 2024 · 8 comments · May be fixed by #1021
Assignees

Comments

@teorth
Copy link
Owner

teorth commented Nov 9, 2024

Proof can be found either at https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/458659-Equational/topic/1323/near/481475622 or in the blueprint at #810.

When done, mark appropriate theorems in the blueprint with \lean and \leanok tags and remove the appropriate conjectures from Conjectures.lean.

@teorth teorth converted this from a draft issue Nov 9, 2024
@teorth teorth changed the title LINEAR-GREEDY HYBRID: Refute 1323->2744 LINEAR-GREEDY HYBRID: Refute 1323->2744 and 1898 -> 2710 Nov 9, 2024
@mjtb49
Copy link
Contributor

mjtb49 commented Dec 4, 2024

The 1898 -> 2710 implication has been superseded by the proof of 1729 -> 817.

@teorth
Copy link
Owner Author

teorth commented Dec 5, 2024

Fair point, but I'll keep the claim for now as any refutation of 1323->2744 will likely also give 1898->2710 almost for free, and the proof may be a warmup for the more complicated 1729->817.

@amirlb
Copy link
Contributor

amirlb commented Dec 9, 2024

claim

@teorth teorth moved this from Unclaimed Outstanding Tasks to Claimed Tasks in Equational Theories Project Dec 9, 2024
@teorth
Copy link
Owner Author

teorth commented Dec 9, 2024

I've realized that due to some changes in the proof over time, the 1898->2710 implication no longer comes "for free" from the 1323->2744, so given that it is also implied by 1729->817, I have now removed it.

@teorth teorth changed the title LINEAR-GREEDY HYBRID: Refute 1323->2744 and 1898 -> 2710 LINEAR-GREEDY HYBRID: Refute 1323->2744 Dec 9, 2024
@amirlb
Copy link
Contributor

amirlb commented Dec 10, 2024

Trying to formalize the outline of the proof in Lean, it pointed out a miscalculation in lemma 15.3: When trying to prove Ly Ry x = R_Sy x in the case where x and y are both non-squares with the same square, in the next-to-last sentence in the proof, equation 3 reduces to (ϕ_a(a + c) y, a) = (-x, a). But we have x = ϕ_a(c) y, and the ϕ's don't cancel out.

This problem is solved by replacing ℚ* with a group ℤ/2 × G for some large-enough abelian group G, and requiring that the relation between ϕ_a(a + b) and ϕ_a(b) is flipping the first coordinate instead of inversion.

Do you think this change would break other parts of the proof? What properties does G need to have to prevent collisions? I'll probably implement the direct sum of in infinite number of copies of ℤ/2 for the squares part, would it be enough to take as G as well?

@amirlb
Copy link
Contributor

amirlb commented Dec 10, 2024

Seems to me that the simplest fix in the blueprint is to change 15.2 to say phi(a+b) = -phi(b). The formal proof will probably use some variant on the free group, like other formalizations in this project.

@teorth
Copy link
Owner Author

teorth commented Dec 10, 2024

Yes, I think that fixes it. Thanks for locating the issue! I've updated the blueprint accordingly.

@amirlb
Copy link
Contributor

amirlb commented Dec 12, 2024

propose #1021

@github-actions github-actions bot linked a pull request Dec 12, 2024 that will close this issue
@teorth teorth moved this from Claimed Tasks to In Progress in Equational Theories Project Dec 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: In Progress
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants