Encyclopedia Cosmology Cosmology Rs Cosmo Module 005 Rscosmo005 Cert
ARTICLE 2 claims 2 theorems
Cosmology Rs Cosmo Module 005 Rscosmo005 Cert
A machine-checked certificate proves three general facts about a cost function, yet says nothing about cosmology itself.
The certificate
A certificate in a machine-checked library of formal theorems is a packaged set of proved statements. The one called RSCosmo005Cert collects three facts about a mathematical function called cost, a measure of recognition effort. The first fact: when the two inputs to the cost are equal, the cost is zero. The second: for positive inputs, the cost is never negative. The third: a certain threshold value, phi minus 1.5, is greater than zero. These are the entire contents of the certificate.
The three facts follow from the general theory of the cost function, not from anything specific to cosmology. The cost is defined as J(m/e), where J is a function that satisfies a forced composition law. The certificate proves properties of this J, but the module never defines what m and e mean in physical terms. The docstring records a research note: the intended application was to compare a tensor value 2/(44*phi^2) against a Planck threshold, but that comparison is not part of the proved certificate.
What the certificate does not claim is important. It does not claim that the tensor value satisfies the Planck bound. It does not claim that m and e represent any particular physical quantities. It does not claim that the threshold phi minus 1.5 has cosmological significance. The certificate is a template: the same three facts are stated once, universally, in a shared module, and this cosmology module inherits them verbatim. To make this a theorem about cosmology, one would need to define m and e in the subject's own terms, and no such definition appears here.
The honest reading is that RSCosmo005Cert is a well-formed but empty vessel. It proves real mathematics about the cost function, and that mathematics is correct. But the leap from a general cost property to a statement about the universe is not made in this file. The research note is a statement of intention, not a result. A reader who wants a cosmology theorem must look elsewhere, or supply the missing definitions themselves.
THEOREM domainCost_at_eq · domainCost_nonneg · canonicalThreshold_pos · IndisputableMonolith/Cosmology/RS_Cosmo_Module_005.lean
theorem domainCost_at_eq (r : ℝ) (h : r ≠ 0) : domainCost r r = 0 := by
unfold domainCost; rw [div_self h]; exact Jcost_unit0
theorem domainCost_nonneg (m e : ℝ) (hm : 0 < m) (he : 0 < e) : 0 ≤ domainCost m e := by
unfold domainCost; exact Jcost_nonneg (div_pos hm he)
theorem canonicalThreshold_pos : 0 < canonicalThreshold := by
unfold canonicalThreshold; linarith [phi_gt_onePointFive]
THEOREM domainCost · IndisputableMonolith/Cosmology/RS_Cosmo_Module_005.lean
def domainCost (m e : ℝ) : ℝ := Jcost (m / e)
What this page does not claim
The certificate does not prove that the tensor value satisfies the Planck bound. The certificate does not establish that phi minus 1.5 has any cosmological meaning. The certificate is not specific to cosmology; it is a shared template.
Verify this page
Every tagged claim above names its theorem. To check one yourself rather than trust this page, elaborate the source module with Lean 4 and audit its axiom basis:
$ lake env lean IndisputableMonolith/Cosmology/RS_Cosmo_Module_005.lean
expected axiom basis: [propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound] (the Lean kernel's standard three; no RS-specific axioms)
A page whose claims cannot be reproduced this way does not ship. In production, every anchor links to the exact declaration in the public source release, and this block carries the build receipt for the page itself.
Derived articles
This page is generated by a question-recursion engine: the questions its answers raise become the next pages. The current agenda, with open targets marked red:
- What physical definitions of m and e would make the cost function a statement about cosmology?
- Does any other module in the framework supply the missing definitions for this intended application?
- What is the tensor value 2/(44*phi^2) and how would it be derived from the framework?
- What does the Planck threshold 0.036 represent in the framework's units?
MACHINE LAYER · GROUNDED CLAIM TABLE · CLICK TO EXPAND
THEOREM domainCost_at_eq · domainCost_nonneg · canonicalThreshold_pos · IndisputableMonolith/Cosmology/RS_Cosmo_Module_005.lean
theorem domainCost_at_eq (r : ℝ) (h : r ≠ 0) : domainCost r r = 0 := by unfold domainCost; rw [div_self h]; exact Jcost_unit0theorem domainCost_nonneg (m e : ℝ) (hm : 0 < m) (he : 0 < e) : 0 ≤ domainCost m e := by unfold domainCost; exact Jcost_nonneg (div_pos hm he)theorem canonicalThreshold_pos : 0 < canonicalThreshold := by unfold canonicalThreshold; linarith [phi_gt_onePointFive]The certificate proves three facts: cost is zero at equality, nonnegative for positive inputs, and the threshold phi minus 1.5 is positive. domainCost_at_eq · domainCost_nonneg · canonicalThreshold_pos · IndisputableMonolith/Cosmology/RS_Cosmo_Module_005.leanTHEOREM domainCost · IndisputableMonolith/Cosmology/RS_Cosmo_Module_005.lean
def domainCost (m e : ℝ) : ℝ := Jcost (m / e)The certificate does not define m and e in physical terms, so it says nothing specific to cosmology. domainCost · IndisputableMonolith/Cosmology/RS_Cosmo_Module_005.lean