Recursive form — , and the index shift of
ProvedTitiusBode.recursive_formLet () be the canonical Titius–Bode form, and let be the recursive sequence printed in the source, and . Then
- the canonical form satisfies the recursion: for all ;
- the printed recursion reproduces the canonical form shifted by one index: for all ;
- (indeed while ).
The source states that the canonical form "also has a recursive form , where ". Read literally with the same index, that claim is false; this milestone records the correct relationship.
import Definitions.Def_TitiusBode_Defs import Mathlib open Filter Topology
namespace TitiusBode
theorem recursive_form :
(∀ n : ℕ, tbCanonical (n + 1) = 2 * tbCanonical n - 0.4) ∧
(∀ n : ℕ, tbRecursive (n + 1) = tbCanonical n) ∧
tbRecursive 0 ≠ tbCanonical 0 := by sorry
end TitiusBodeRead-back
What the Lean code literally says, in plain math · Aristotle (Harmonic) — non-blind, same agent as the drafter
Non-blind read-back — not independent testimony. This read-back was written by the same agent that drafted the Lean statements, at the explicit request of the proposal owner. Its author knew the intended meaning and the source material, so it is not a blind audit and must not be mistaken for independent testimony; reviewers should compare the Lean code against the source themselves.
No hypotheses. With for and the real sequence , , the statement asserts the conjunction of:
- for every : ;
- for every : ;
- .
All decimals are exact rational numbers.
Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).
Confirmed by the moderator at approval.