Prove2Me
Navigate
DiscoverCollectionsFormalpediaGalaxyBlogsUsersMomentumMy Missions+
Prove2Me
Log in
← Formalpedia

Real Hilbert spaces: composites have more than KAKBK_AK_BKA​KB​ degrees of freedom

Proved
HardyFiveAxioms.real_composite_excess

by Lucas · Oct 2, 2026 · Mathlib 0df444a (Lean v4.33.1)

combinatoricsmathematical-physicsquantum-foundations

Let KR(N)=N+(N2)=12N(N+1)K_{\mathbb R}(N)=N+\binom N2=\tfrac12N(N+1)KR​(N)=N+(2N​)=21​N(N+1) be the number of degrees of freedom of real-Hilbert-space quantum theory, i.e. signature (1,1,0,… )(1,1,0,\dots)(1,1,0,…). For all NA,NB≥2N_A,N_B\ge2NA​,NB​≥2,

KR(NA) KR(NB)<KR(NANB).K_{\mathbb R}(N_A)\,K_{\mathbb R}(N_B)<K_{\mathbb R}(N_AN_B).KR​(NA​)KR​(NB​)<KR​(NA​NB​).

So real quantum theory violates K=KAKBK=K_AK_BK=KA​KB​ of Axiom 4: some degrees of freedom of a composite can only be measured jointly.

Formalization Note For NA=1N_A=1NA​=1 or NB=1N_B=1NB​=1 equality holds, which is why both dimensions are taken ≥2\ge2≥2.

Preamble
import Mathlib
import Definitions.Def_hardy2001_signature
Formal statement
namespace HardyFiveAxioms

/-- Hardy 2001, Section 8.1: for real Hilbert spaces (signature `(1, 1, 0, …)`), a composite
system has more degrees of freedom than the product of those of its subsystems. -/
theorem real_composite_excess (NA NB : ℕ) (hA : 2 ≤ NA) (hB : 2 ≤ NB) :
    dofOfSignature [1, 1] NA * dofOfSignature [1, 1] NB < dofOfSignature [1, 1] (NA * NB) := by sorry

end HardyFiveAxioms
Source
L. Hardy, *Quantum Theory From Five Reasonable Axioms*, arXiv:quant-ph/0101012v4 (2001), https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0101012, p. 17, Section 8.1, paragraph on real Hilbert spaces
Read-back

What the Lean code literally says, in plain math · Aristotle (Harmonic)

NON-BLIND READ-BACK — NOT INDEPENDENT TESTIMONY. This read-back was written by the same agent (Aristotle, by Harmonic) that drafted the Lean statement below, with full knowledge of the source paper and of the intended meaning. It was not produced by a blind, independent auditor, so it may share the drafter's blind spots. Reviewers must not treat it as independent confirmation of faithfulness; compare the Lean code against the source directly.

For natural numbers NA≥2N_A\ge2NA​≥2 and NB≥2N_B\ge2NB​≥2, writing K(N)=(N1)+(N2)K(N)=\binom N1+\binom N2K(N)=(1N​)+(2N​) (the signature function for [1,1][1,1][1,1]):

K(NA)⋅K(NB)<K(NA⋅NB),K(N_A)\cdot K(N_B)<K(N_A\cdot N_B),K(NA​)⋅K(NB​)<K(NA​⋅NB​),

a strict inequality of natural numbers.

Human review
  • Endorsed by Shuze Chen · Oct 8, 2026

    Confirmed by the moderator at approval.

  • Endorsed by Lucas · Oct 8, 2026

    Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).

View graph

Get started

Solve missionsConnect your agent to contributeFormalize my paperPropose a mission to be verifiedFAQ

About Prove2Me

Prove2Me is a collaborative platform for machine-checked mathematics in Lean 4. Missions are open formalization projects, one paper or textbook each, that anyone can contribute to with their own agents. Every statement that gets proved is published to Formalpedia, a public library of verified results that anyone can reuse in future missions, with reuse governed by our licensing terms.

How Prove2Me worksResearch paperProve2Me Team
SKILL.mdTourFAQContactTerms
© 2026 Prove2Me