Encyclopedia Foundation Foundation Inequalities J Formula Min At One

ARTICLE 4 claims 4 theorems

Foundation Inequalities J Formula Min At One

A single point, x = 1, is where the recognition cost function J reaches its lowest value, zero; the theorem pins down that exact spot.

The minimum of J

The recognition cost function, written J(x), measures the price of recognition in a discrete ledger of events. The declaration J_formula_min_at_one establishes that when x equals 1, this cost is exactly zero. It is a simple arithmetic fact: (1 + 1/1) / 2 - 1 = 0. The theorem does not merely assert that zero is a possible value; it identifies the specific input that produces it.

The broader context comes from the AM-GM inequality, a classical result stating that for any positive number x, the sum x + 1/x is at least 2. The framework's library proves this inequality and then derives from it that J(x) is never negative. The minimum at x = 1 is the sharp edge of that inequality: the cost cannot go below zero, and it touches zero only at that single point. Away from x = 1, for any other positive value, the cost is strictly positive.

In Recognition Science, this minimum has a structural meaning. The cost function J is forced by five plain conditions, and its uniqueness is a proved theorem in the framework's machine-checked library. The fact that J bottoms out at x = 1 means that recognition at unity, recognizing something as exactly itself, carries no cost. Every other recognition event, comparing something to something it is not, incurs a positive price. The golden ratio φ appears later in the framework as the unique self-similar scaling, and its cost is (√5 - 2)/2, a positive number consistent with this minimum.

What the declaration does not claim is equally precise. It does not say that x = 1 is the only point where J is defined; J is defined for all positive x. It does not claim that the minimum is unique in any broader sense, only that the value at x = 1 is zero and all other values are larger. The theorem is a local fact about a specific formula, not a statement about the origin of that formula or its philosophical implications.

THEOREM J_formula_min_at_one · IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/Inequalities.lean
/-- J-cost achieves minimum 0 at x = 1. -/
theorem J_formula_min_at_one : (1 + 1/(1 : ℝ)) / 2 - 1 = 0 := by norm_num
THEOREM J_formula_nonneg · am_gm_reciprocal · IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/Inequalities.lean
/-- J-cost is non-negative: J(x) = (x + 1/x)/2 - 1 ≥ 0 for x > 0.

    This follows directly from AM-GM. -/
theorem J_formula_nonneg {x : ℝ} (hx : x > 0) : (x + 1/x) / 2 - 1 ≥ 0 := by
  have h := am_gm_reciprocal hx
  linarith
/-- The AM-GM inequality for x and 1/x: for all x > 0, x + 1/x ≥ 2.

    This is the fundamental inequality that forces J-cost ≥ 0.

    **Proof**: Use Mathlib's `add_div_two_ge_sqrt_mul_self_of_sq_le_sq` or direct algebra. -/
theorem am_gm_reciprocal {x : ℝ} (hx : x > 0) : x + 1/x ≥ 2 := by
  have h1 : x * (1/x) = 1 := by field_simp
  have h2 : (x - 1/x)^2 ≥ 0 := sq_nonneg _
  -- (x - 1/x)² = x² - 2 + 1/x²
  -- So x² + 1/x² ≥ 2
  -- We need: x + 1/x ≥ 2
  -- Use: (x + 1/x)² = x² + 2 + 1/x² ≥ 4, so x + 1/x ≥ 2 (since both positive)
  have hx_inv_pos : 1/x > 0 := by positivity
  have h_sum_pos : x + 1/x > 0 := by linarith
  -- Alternative: direct Mathlib lemma
  have h3 : x + 1/x = x + x⁻¹ := by rw [one_div]
  rw [h3]
  -- Use add_inv_le_iff or similar
  nlinarith [sq_nonneg (x - 1), sq_nonneg (x - x⁻¹), sq_nonneg x, sq_nonneg x⁻¹,
             mul_pos hx hx_inv_pos]
THEOREM J_formula_pos · IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/Inequalities.lean
/-- J-cost is strictly positive away from x = 1. -/
theorem J_formula_pos {x : ℝ} (hx : x > 0) (hne : x ≠ 1) : (x + 1/x) / 2 - 1 > 0 := by
  have h := am_gm_reciprocal_strict hx hne
  linarith
THEOREM J_cost_phi · IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/Inequalities.lean
/-- J-cost of φ -/
theorem J_cost_phi : (φ + 1/φ) / 2 - 1 = (Real.sqrt 5 - 2) / 2 := by
  rw [phi_plus_inv]
  ring

What this page does not claim

The declaration does not prove that x = 1 is the only point where J is defined; J is defined for all positive x. The theorem does not explain why the cost function has this form; it only establishes a property of the given formula. This result does not claim that the minimum is unique in any broader sense beyond the value at x = 1 being zero and all other values being larger.

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/Foundation/Inequalities.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:

MACHINE LAYER · GROUNDED CLAIM TABLE · CLICK TO EXPAND