pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in
theorem proved term proof high

composition_refines

show as:
view Lean formalization →

For nonzero integers, joint indistinguishability under the sign recognizer and magnitude recognizer forces the pair to be equal or negatives. Researchers modeling measurement refinement in recognition geometries cite this to show how separate coarse partitions combine into a finer one. The proof reduces the joint conditions to absolute-value equality via simplification and then applies case analysis on the integer sign possibilities.

claimFor all nonzero integers $n$ and $m$, if $n$ and $m$ lie in the same sign class and the same absolute-value class, then $n = m$ or $n = -m$.

background

The sign recognizer on the integers partitions into three classes (negative, zero, positive). The magnitude recognizer partitions by absolute value, producing one class per nonnegative integer. Indistinguishability under either recognizer means the two integers map to the same class under that partition; the theorem concerns the conjunction of the two relations.

proof idea

The term proof introduces the variables and the two indistinguishability hypotheses, simplifies the recognizer definitions to obtain absolute-value equality, invokes the standard lemma that equal absolute values imply the numbers are equal or negatives, and discharges the disjunction by case split.

why it matters in Recognition Science

The result encodes the Composition Principle for these concrete recognizers and is referenced by the module's status summary. It illustrates how recognizer composition refines equivalence classes, consistent with the Recognition Composition Law that enforces multiplicative consistency across the framework. The example supports the broader claim that observables in the Recognition Science setting act as class maps whose joint action yields higher resolution.

scope and limits

formal statement (Lean)

 150theorem composition_refines :
 151    (∀ n m : ℤ, n ≠ 0 → m ≠ 0 →
 152      (Indistinguishable signRecognizer n m ∧ Indistinguishable magnitudeRecognizer n m) →
 153      n = m ∨ n = -m) := by

proof body

Term-mode proof.

 154  intro n m hn hm ⟨hsign, hmag⟩
 155  simp only [Indistinguishable, signRecognizer, magnitudeRecognizer] at hsign hmag
 156  -- Same sign and same magnitude implies n = m or n = -m
 157  have h1 : n.natAbs = m.natAbs := hmag
 158  -- If signs match and magnitudes match, must be equal or negatives
 159  rcases Int.natAbs_eq_natAbs_iff.mp h1 with h | h
 160  · left; exact h
 161  · right; exact h
 162
 163/-! ## Physical Interpretation -/
 164
 165/-! ### Physical Interpretation
 166
 167These examples show how recognizers model measurement in physics:
 168- **Discrete** = perfect measurement (eigenvalue detection)
 169- **Sign/magnitude** = coarse measurements (binary outcomes)
 170- **Composition** = combined measurements with finer resolution
 171
 172In quantum mechanics, observables ARE recognizers mapping states to eigenvalues. -/
 173
 174/-! ## Module Status -/
 175

used by (1)

From the project-wide theorem graph. These declarations reference this one in their body.

depends on (11)

Lean names referenced from this declaration's body.