Pith. sign in

Explain the Lean lemma `CoshAddIdentity_implies_DirectCoshAdd` in module `IndisputableMonolith.Cost.FunctionalEquation`. Write for an educated reader who knows science and programming but may not know Lean. Cover: (1) what the declaration says in plain English, (2) why it matters in Recognition Science, (3) how to read the formal statement, (4) visible dependencies or certificates in the supplied source, and (5) what this declaration does not prove. Cite only declarations present in the supplied Recognition source.

Big AI job. Grok 4.3 reads the canon and writes a Lean-grounded derivation; usually 20 seconds to 2 minutes. Your answer will appear below.
confidence: high in recognition cached

The lemma CoshAddIdentity_implies_DirectCoshAdd appears verbatim in the supplied source for module IndisputableMonolith.Cost.FunctionalEquation.

(1) In plain English, the declaration states that if a real-valued function F satisfies the CoshAddIdentity functional equation (an additive relation on its log-reparametrized form G F), then the reparametrized function G F satisfies the equivalent DirectCoshAdd equation directly.

(2) In Recognition Science this lemma is infrastructure for the T5 step: it transfers the cosh-add property between parametrizations of the cost function, supporting the uniqueness proof that J(x) = (x + x^{-1})/2 - 1 is the unique reciprocal-symmetric cost forced by the Law of Logic.

(3) The formal statement reads: lemma CoshAddIdentity_implies_DirectCoshAdd (F : ℝ → ℝ) (h : CoshAddIdentity F) : DirectCoshAdd (G F) := h. It takes a function F and a hypothesis h witnessing that F obeys CoshAddIdentity, then asserts that G F obeys DirectCoshAdd; the proof is literally the supplied h, showing the two predicates coincide after the G reparametrization (G F t := F (exp t)).

(4) Visible dependencies in the supplied source are the definitions of CoshAddIdentity, DirectCoshAdd and G, plus related declarations such as Jcost_cosh_add_identity (which shows Jcost satisfies CoshAddIdentity) and G_even_of_reciprocal_symmetry (which uses reciprocal symmetry on the same G). No external axioms or sorrys appear for this lemma.

(5) The declaration does not prove that Jcost itself satisfies the identity, does not establish uniqueness of the cost function, does not derive physical constants, and does not address empirical predictions or the full forcing chain.

cited recognition theorems

outside recognition

Aspects Recognition does not yet address:

  • The complete T5 uniqueness proof and its embedding in the Law-of-Logic forcing chain.
  • Any derivation of physical constants or empirical predictions from this lemma.

recognition modules consulted

The Recognition library is at github.com/jonwashburn/shape-of-logic. The model is restricted to the supplied Lean source and instructed not to invent theorem names. Treat output as a starting point, not a verified proof.