Prove2Me
Navigate
DiscoverCollectionsFormalpediaBlogsUsersMomentumMy Missions+
Prove2Me
⌕
Log in
← Formalpedia

Lattice Hamiltonian constraints are second class

Proved
WheelerDeWittSuperspace.constraints_not_first_class

by Mazecto · Oct 5, 2026 · Mathlib 0df444a (Lean v4.33.1)

general-relativitymathematical-physicsquantum-gravity

Let κ≠0\kappa\neq0κ=0, let each R(⋅,z)R(\cdot,z)R(⋅,z) be C1C^1C1, let hhh be a physical configuration and x≠yx\neq yx=y two sites. Suppose the potential at yyy depends on the metric at xxx, in the sense that the symmetric part of ∂Vy/∂hab(x)\partial V_y/\partial h_{ab}(x)∂Vy​/∂hab​(x) is nonzero at hhh. Then there are momenta ppp such that every lattice constraint vanishes,

Hz(h,p)=0for all z,H_z(h,p)=0\quad\text{for all } z,Hz​(h,p)=0for all z,

and yet

{Hx,Hy}(h,p)≠0.\{H_x,H_y\}(h,p)\neq0 .{Hx​,Hy​}(h,p)=0.

Hence the lattice constraints are not first class. Every finite-difference scalar curvature couples neighbouring sites, so this applies to every such discretization of the Wheeler–DeWitt constraint.

Preamble
import Definitions.Def_WheelerDeWittSuperspace

set_option autoImplicit false

open Matrix
Formal statement
namespace WheelerDeWittSuperspace

/-- Goal (lattice constraints are second class): as soon
as the potential at `y` depends on the metric at a different site `x` (as for any
finite-difference curvature), there is a point on the constraint surface where the two
constraints do not Poisson-commute. -/
theorem constraints_not_first_class {X : Type*} [Fintype X] [DecidableEq X] (kappa Lam : ℝ)
    (hkappa : kappa ≠ 0) (R : Config X → X → ℝ) (hR : ∀ z, ContDiff ℝ 1 (fun h => R h z))
    (h : Config X) (hh : IsPhysical h) (x y : X) (hxy : x ≠ y)
    (hdep : ∃ a b, partialR (fun h' => potentialAt kappa Lam R h' y) x a b h +
        partialR (fun h' => potentialAt kappa Lam R h' y) x b a h ≠ 0) :
    ∃ p : Config X, (∀ z, classicalConstraint kappa Lam R z (h, p) = 0) ∧
      poisson (classicalConstraint kappa Lam R x) (classicalConstraint kappa Lam R y) (h, p) ≠ 0 := by sorry

end WheelerDeWittSuperspace
Source
R. Loll, Discrete approaches to quantum gravity in four dimensions, Living Rev. Relativ. 1 (1998), Section 2.12, https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9805049; B. Dittrich, https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.3594, p. 6; B. Bahr, B. Dittrich, https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1670; M. Bander, Phys. Rev. D 36 (1987) 2297
Read-back

What the Lean code literally says, in plain math · claude-opus-5-5

Read-back of constraints_not_first_class.

Setting. Let XXX be any finite type of "sites" with decidable equality. No lower bound on its size is assumed, but the hypothesis x≠yx \neq yx=y below forces ∣X∣≥2|X| \ge 2∣X∣≥2. A configuration hhh assigns to every site z∈Xz \in Xz∈X an arbitrary real 3×33\times 33×3 array h(z)=(hab(z))a,b∈{0,1,2}h(z) = (h_{ab}(z))_{a,b \in \{0,1,2\}}h(z)=(hab​(z))a,b∈{0,1,2}​. All 9∣X∣9|X|9∣X∣ entries are independent real coordinates, and symmetry is not built in. Configuration space C=(R3×3)X\mathcal C = (\mathbb R^{3\times 3})^XC=(R3×3)X is a finite-dimensional real normed space. The phase space is C×C\mathcal C \times \mathcal CC×C, whose points are (h,p)(h,p)(h,p). Here the momentum ppp is likewise an arbitrary real 3×33\times 33×3 array p(z)=(pab(z))p(z) = (p^{ab}(z))p(z)=(pab(z)) at each site, which need not be symmetric.

Definitions used (unfolded). For a real 3×33\times33×3 matrix mmm:

  • vol⁡(m)=det⁡m\operatorname{vol}(m) = \sqrt{\det m}vol(m)=detm​, using the real square root. This returns 000 when det⁡m≤0\det m \le 0detm≤0.
  • The supermetric is
Gabcd(m)=macmbd+madmbc−mabmcd2 vol⁡(m).G_{abcd}(m) = \frac{m_{ac}m_{bd} + m_{ad}m_{bc} - m_{ab}m_{cd}}{2\,\operatorname{vol}(m)}.Gabcd​(m)=2vol(m)mac​mbd​+mad​mbc​−mab​mcd​​.

The division is total, so this is 000 when vol⁡(m)=0\operatorname{vol}(m)=0vol(m)=0.

Fix real numbers κ,Λ\kappa, \Lambdaκ,Λ and a map R:C×X→RR : \mathcal C \times X \to \mathbb RR:C×X→R, written R(h,z)R(h,z)R(h,z).

  • The potential at site zzz is
Vz(h)=−(2κ)−1 det⁡h(z) (R(h,z)−2Λ).V_z(h) = -(2\kappa)^{-1}\,\sqrt{\det h(z)}\,\bigl(R(h,z) - 2\Lambda\bigr).Vz​(h)=−(2κ)−1deth(z)​(R(h,z)−2Λ).
  • The classical constraint at site zzz is the function on phase space
Cz(h,p)=2κ∑a,b,c,d=02Gabcd(h(z)) pab(z) pcd(z)  +  Vz(h).C_z(h,p) = 2\kappa \sum_{a,b,c,d=0}^{2} G_{abcd}(h(z))\,p^{ab}(z)\,p^{cd}(z) \;+\; V_z(h).Cz​(h,p)=2κa,b,c,d=0∑2​Gabcd​(h(z))pab(z)pcd(z)+Vz​(h).
  • For S:C→RS:\mathcal C\to\mathbb RS:C→R, the partial derivative ∂ab(x)S(h)\partial_{ab(x)} S(h)∂ab(x)​S(h) is the Fréchet derivative of SSS at hhh, applied to the coordinate direction ex,abe_{x,ab}ex,ab​. That direction has entry 111 at site xxx, row aaa, column bbb, and 000 everywhere else. The entries (a,b)(a,b)(a,b) and (b,a)(b,a)(b,a) are separate coordinates. If SSS is not differentiable at hhh, this value is 000 by convention.
  • The Poisson bracket of F,G:C×C→RF,G : \mathcal C\times\mathcal C \to \mathbb RF,G:C×C→R at w=(h,p)w=(h,p)w=(h,p) is
{F,G}(w)=∑z∈X∑a,b=02(DF(w)[(ez,ab,0)]  DG(w)[(0,ez,ab)]−DF(w)[(0,ez,ab)]  DG(w)[(ez,ab,0)]).\{F,G\}(w) = \sum_{z\in X}\sum_{a,b=0}^{2}\Bigl( DF(w)[(e_{z,ab},0)]\; DG(w)[(0,e_{z,ab})] - DF(w)[(0,e_{z,ab})]\; DG(w)[(e_{z,ab},0)] \Bigr).{F,G}(w)=z∈X∑​a,b=0∑2​(DF(w)[(ez,ab​,0)]DG(w)[(0,ez,ab​)]−DF(w)[(0,ez,ab​)]DG(w)[(ez,ab​,0)]).

Here DDD is the Fréchet derivative on the product space, again defined as 000 at points of non-differentiability. The sum runs over all 9 ordered index pairs, not only over symmetric combinations.

Hypotheses. The theorem quantifies over the following:

  • XXX, as above.
  • Reals κ,Λ\kappa, \Lambdaκ,Λ with κ≠0\kappa \neq 0κ=0.
  • A map RRR such that for every site zzz the function h↦R(h,z)h \mapsto R(h,z)h↦R(h,z) is continuously differentiable (C1C^1C1) on all of C\mathcal CC, including non-physical configurations. Nothing else is assumed about RRR. It need not be local, and it need not be related to any curvature.
  • A configuration hhh that is physical: for every site zzz, the matrix h(z)h(z)h(z) is symmetric and positive definite. In particular det⁡h(z)>0\det h(z) > 0deth(z)>0 and det⁡h(z)>0\sqrt{\det h(z)} > 0deth(z)​>0 at every site.
  • Two sites x,y∈Xx, y \in Xx,y∈X with x≠yx \neq yx=y.
  • A dependence hypothesis: there exist indices a,b∈{0,1,2}a,b \in \{0,1,2\}a,b∈{0,1,2} such that
∂ab(x)Vy(h)+∂ba(x)Vy(h)≠0.\partial_{ab(x)} V_y(h) + \partial_{ba(x)} V_y(h) \neq 0.∂ab(x)​Vy​(h)+∂ba(x)​Vy​(h)=0.

This is the symmetrized derivative of the potential at yyy with respect to the metric entry (a,b)(a,b)(a,b) at the other site xxx. When a=ba=ba=b it reads 2 ∂aa(x)Vy(h)≠02\,\partial_{aa(x)}V_y(h)\neq 02∂aa(x)​Vy​(h)=0.

What the dependence hypothesis amounts to. Since x≠yx\neq yx=y, the factor det⁡h′(y)\sqrt{\det h'(y)}deth′(y)​ does not change along ex,abe_{x,ab}ex,ab​. At the physical hhh it is also differentiable and positive, and R(⋅,y)R(\cdot,y)R(⋅,y) is differentiable. So the hypothesis is equivalent to

∃ a,b:∂ab(x)R(h,y)+∂ba(x)R(h,y)≠0.\exists\, a,b:\quad \partial_{ab(x)} R(h,y) + \partial_{ba(x)} R(h,y) \neq 0.∃a,b:∂ab(x)​R(h,y)+∂ba(x)​R(h,y)=0.

Put differently, RRR at site yyy must depend on the metric at site xxx through a symmetrized derivative. A dependence only through the antisymmetric part hab(x)−hba(x)h_{ab}(x)-h_{ba}(x)hab​(x)−hba​(x) does not satisfy it.

The hypothesis can be satisfied. For example, R(h′,z)=h00′(x)R(h',z) = h'_{00}(x)R(h′,z)=h00′​(x) for all zzz is C1C^1C1 and gives ∂00(x)Vy(h)=−(2κ)−1det⁡h(y)≠0\partial_{00(x)}V_y(h) = -(2\kappa)^{-1}\sqrt{\det h(y)} \neq 0∂00(x)​Vy​(h)=−(2κ)−1deth(y)​=0. So the hypotheses are jointly consistent whenever ∣X∣≥2|X|\ge 2∣X∣≥2.

Conclusion. There exists a momentum configuration p∈Cp \in \mathcal Cp∈C satisfying both of the following:

  1. Every constraint vanishes: Cz(h,p)=0C_z(h,p) = 0Cz​(h,p)=0 for every site z∈Xz \in Xz∈X, at the given physical configuration hhh.
  2. The bracket of the two constraints is nonzero:
{Cx,Cy}(h,p)≠0.\{C_x, C_y\}(h,p) \neq 0.{Cx​,Cy​}(h,p)=0.

The momentum ppp ranges over arbitrary real 3×33\times33×3 arrays per site. It is not required to be symmetric, and nothing ties it to hhh beyond condition 1. The existence of such a ppp is itself part of what the theorem asserts. The configuration hhh is fixed as the one given in the hypotheses, not chosen.

Remarks on the bracket. At a physical hhh with R(⋅,z)R(\cdot,z)R(⋅,z) of class C1C^1C1, each CzC_zCz​ is differentiable at (h,p)(h,p)(h,p). So the junk-value convention for derivatives does not apply here. CzC_zCz​ depends on momenta only through p(z)p(z)p(z), and its kinetic part depends only on h(z)h(z)h(z). Because x≠yx\neq yx=y, the only terms of the bracket that can be nonzero are therefore

{Cx,Cy}(h,p)=∑a,b(∂hab(y)Vx(h) ∂pab(y)Cy(h,p)−∂pab(x)Cx(h,p) ∂hab(x)Vy(h)).\{C_x,C_y\}(h,p) = \sum_{a,b}\Bigl(\partial_{h_{ab}(y)} V_x(h)\,\partial_{p^{ab}(y)}C_y(h,p) - \partial_{p^{ab}(x)}C_x(h,p)\,\partial_{h_{ab}(x)}V_y(h)\Bigr).{Cx​,Cy​}(h,p)=a,b∑​(∂hab​(y)​Vx​(h)∂pab(y)​Cy​(h,p)−∂pab(x)​Cx​(h,p)∂hab​(x)​Vy​(h)).

Not assumed. The statement does not involve ℏ\hbarℏ, any symmetry requirement on ppp, any locality or neighbour structure on XXX, or any restriction on Λ\LambdaΛ.

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

    Confirmed by the moderator at approval.

  • Endorsed by Mazecto · 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 paper
SKILL.mdTourFAQContactTerms
© 2026 Prove2Me