Lieb–Thirring conjecture (Simon 2000, #15)
- Slug:
simon-lieb-thirring - List: Simon 2000 #15
- Solver: Cursor Grok 4.6 xhigh; Grok 4.6 SuperGrok 2026-09-02
- Status: residue vs CCR 1.44655. Later record is Carvalho Corso–Ried, arXiv:2403.04347v2, ratio from . Independent Clausen envelope and . Weidl interpolation, remainder absorption, Neumann covering, and a 1D test-potential search did not beat 1.44655. The q1 family-A pair remains a dent of FHJN 1.456 only. Conjecture not claimed.
- Area: Mathematical physics / spectral theory
- Sources: Simon, Schrödinger Operators in the Twenty-First Century (Mathematical Physics 2000); Lieb–Thirring 1976
- Started: 2026-08-27
In general
For a Schrödinger operator on , write for the negative eigenvalues. The Lieb–Thirring inequality is
The semiclassical (phase-space) constant is . Lieb and Thirring conjectured that the optimal equals , the larger of the semiclassical constant and the one-bound-state (Sobolev) constant. Simon's 2000 problem #15 asks for a proof of that conjecture in the remaining one-dimensional window .
The physically important case is . Duality converts the bound into a kinetic-energy inequality with constant , related by
Laptev–Weidl proved the conjecture for every when . Hundertmark–Lieb–Thomas / Weidl give the sharp one-dimensional value at . The window still has a gap between the one-bound-state lower bound and the best published upper bound.
Precise statement
The published record for the ratio, in every dimension, is no longer the 2018 trial pair. Carvalho Corso–Ried, arXiv:2403.04347v2 (v1 already 7 Mar 2024), solve the FHJN/HKRV variational problem and get
from Table 1.1, , and identification (1.12), . The same one-dimensional lift as FHJN sends the ratio to every . Carvalho Corso, arXiv:2407.10117v2, Corollary 1.8, writes the same bound as a Clausen value and rounds it to .
Frank–Hundertmark–Jex–Nam, arXiv:1808.09017 (JEMS 23 (2021)), Theorem 1 had , with Lemma 11 converting to . The one-bound-state (Sobolev) ratio in is . Eden–Foias (1991), lifted by Dolbeault–Laptev–Loss (arXiv:0708.1165), had .
This folder first attacked the FHJN handle by trial pairs. After CCR, a new pair cannot beat . The leftover handle is a different method, or a certified evaluation of the CCR/Clausen form.
What would count as a new bound
A verified finite improvement of a documented record, for example:
- A smaller rigorous upper bound than the published CCR on (equivalently, a certified or that converts to a ratio strictly below ). An envelope of is a replay, not a new bound.
- A new certified test-function lower bound that moves a published numerical lower bound on or on .
- A reusable exact lemma that strictly tightens one of those conversions.
An incomplete numerical plot of , or a high-precision float with no independently replayable witness, is not a bound. The full Lieb–Thirring conjecture is not claimed unless it is proved.
After 2026-08-27
The published record to cite is Carvalho Corso–Ried, arXiv:2403.04347v2: . The abstract does not contain that number; Corollary 1.7 and Table 1.1 do. v1 already has it. No later paper opened in this folder states a smaller Euclidean ratio. Carvalho Corso, arXiv:2407.10117v2, restates the same bound as .
Independently, the Clausen series for converts to
Python and Rust agree. Replay: compute/q2/run_all.sh. That is an envelope of the published value, not a dent of it.
The q1 family-A pair (compute/q1/opt_best_A.json) is still a dent of FHJN only:
Replay: compute/q1/run_all.sh. Their Lemma 11 second pair does not convert below . Lean proves only the conversion. The Sobolev value is untouched. CCR present as the method ceiling: no FHJN trial pair goes below it.
After 2026-09-02
A later search through other conversions did not beat . Weidl’s interpolation with the sharp endpoint converts to . Seiringer–Solovej remainder absorption at converts to . A Neumann covering at is already on a constant well. A Dirichlet-grid search over square wells, two-sech wells, Gaussian sums, and histograms did not produce a test potential above . Empirical on Hermite blocks sits near , but Eden–Foias still only proves . Replay: compute/q3/run_all.sh. Conjecture not claimed.