P. 17 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 1601-1700   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	nf4dc 1601	Variable 𝑥 is effectively not free in 𝜑 iff 𝜑 is always true or always false, given a decidability condition. The reverse direction, nf4r 1602, holds for all propositions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Jul-2018.)
⊢ (DECID ∃𝑥𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜑)))
Theorem	nf4r 1602	If 𝜑 is always true or always false, then variable 𝑥 is effectively not free in 𝜑. The converse holds given a decidability condition, as seen at nf4dc 1601. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Jul-2018.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜑) → Ⅎ𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	19.36i 1603	Inference from Theorem 19.36 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 2-Feb-2015.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	19.36-1 1604	Closed form of 19.36i 1603. One direction of Theorem 19.36 of [Margaris] p. 90. The converse holds in classical logic, but does not hold (for all propositions) in intuitionistic logic. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 20-Jun-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	19.37-1 1605	One direction of Theorem 19.37 of [Margaris] p. 90. The converse holds in classical logic but not, in general, here. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Jun-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.37aiv 1606*	Inference from Theorem 19.37 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	19.38 1607	Theorem 19.38 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	19.23t 1608	Closed form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 7-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2018.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	19.23 1609	Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Sep-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	19.32dc 1610	Theorem 19.32 of [Margaris] p. 90, where 𝜑 is decidable. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 4-Jun-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (DECID 𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	19.32r 1611	One direction of Theorem 19.32 of [Margaris] p. 90. The converse holds if 𝜑 is decidable, as seen at 19.32dc 1610. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jul-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.31r 1612	One direction of Theorem 19.31 of [Margaris] p. 90. The converse holds in classical logic, but not intuitionistic logic. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jul-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.44 1613	Theorem 19.44 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.45 1614	Theorem 19.45 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.34 1615	Theorem 19.34 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑥𝜓) → ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.41h 1616	Theorem 19.41 of [Margaris] p. 90. New proofs should use 19.41 1617 instead. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.41 1617	Theorem 19.41 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Jan-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.42h 1618	Theorem 19.42 of [Margaris] p. 90. New proofs should use 19.42 1619 instead. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.42 1619	Theorem 19.42 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	excom13 1620	Swap 1st and 3rd existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑦∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	exrot3 1621	Rotate existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	exrot4 1622	Rotate existential quantifiers twice. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑤∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	nexr 1623	Inference from 19.8a 1523. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 26-Jul-2009.)
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ 𝜑
Theorem	exan 1624	Place a conjunct in the scope of an existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	hbexd 1625	Deduction form of bound-variable hypothesis builder hbex 1568. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑦𝜓 → ∀𝑥∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	eeor 1626	Rearrange existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 8-Aug-1994.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑦𝜓))
1.3.8  Equality theorems without distinct variables
Theorem	a9e 1627	At least one individual exists. This is not a theorem of free logic, which is sound in empty domains. For such a logic, we would add this theorem as an axiom of set theory (Axiom 0 of [Kunen] p. 10). In the system consisting of ax-5 1377 through ax-14 1446 and ax-17 1460, all axioms other than ax-9 1465 are believed to be theorems of free logic, although the system without ax-9 1465 is probably not complete in free logic. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	a9ev 1628*	At least one individual exists. Weaker version of a9e 1627. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-2017.)
⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	ax9o 1629	An implication related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → 𝜑)
Theorem	equid 1630	Identity law for equality (reflexivity). Lemma 6 of [Tarski] p. 68. This is often an axiom of equality in textbook systems, but we don't need it as an axiom since it can be proved from our other axioms. This proof is similar to Tarski's and makes use of a dummy variable 𝑦. It also works in intuitionistic logic, unlike some other possible ways of proving this theorem. (Contributed by NM, 1-Apr-2005.)
⊢ 𝑥 = 𝑥
Theorem	nfequid 1631	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for 𝑥 = 𝑥. This theorem tells us that any variable, including 𝑥, is effectively not free in 𝑥 = 𝑥, even though 𝑥 is technically free according to the traditional definition of free variable. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jan-2011.) (Revised by NM, 21-Aug-2017.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦 𝑥 = 𝑥
Theorem	stdpc6 1632	One of the two equality axioms of standard predicate calculus, called reflexivity of equality. (The other one is stdpc7 1694.) Axiom 6 of [Mendelson] p. 95. Mendelson doesn't say why he prepended the redundant quantifier, but it was probably to be compatible with free logic (which is valid in the empty domain). (Contributed by NM, 16-Feb-2005.)
⊢ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥
Theorem	equcomi 1633	Commutative law for equality. Lemma 7 of [Tarski] p. 69. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑦 = 𝑥)
Theorem	equcom 1634	Commutative law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 20-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑥)
Theorem	equcoms 1635	An inference commuting equality in antecedent. Used to eliminate the need for a syllogism. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑)
Theorem	equtr 1636	A transitive law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑦 = 𝑧 → 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	equtrr 1637	A transitive law for equality. Lemma L17 in [Megill] p. 446 (p. 14 of the preprint). (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑥 → 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	equtr2 1638	A transitive law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑧) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	equequ1 1639	An equivalence law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑧))
Theorem	equequ2 1640	An equivalence law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	elequ1 1641	An identity law for the non-logical predicate. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑧))
Theorem	elequ2 1642	An identity law for the non-logical predicate. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	ax11i 1643	Inference that has ax-11 1438 (without ∀𝑦) as its conclusion and doesn't require ax-10 1437, ax-11 1438, or ax-12 1443 for its proof. The hypotheses may be eliminable without one or more of these axioms in special cases. Proof similar to Lemma 16 of [Tarski] p. 70. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-2008.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))
1.3.9  Axioms ax-10 and ax-11
Theorem	ax10o 1644	Show that ax-10o 1645 can be derived from ax-10 1437. An open problem is whether this theorem can be derived from ax-10 1437 and the others when ax-11 1438 is replaced with ax-11o 1745. See theorem ax10 1646 for the rederivation of ax-10 1437 from ax10o 1644. Normally, ax10o 1644 should be used rather than ax-10o 1645, except by theorems specifically studying the latter's properties. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-2008.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))
Axiom	ax-10o 1645	Axiom ax-10o 1645 ("o" for "old") was the original version of ax-10 1437, before it was discovered (in May 2008) that the shorter ax-10 1437 could replace it. It appears as Axiom scheme C11' in [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of the preprint). This axiom is redundant, as shown by theorem ax10o 1644. Normally, ax10o 1644 should be used rather than ax-10o 1645, except by theorems specifically studying the latter's properties. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	ax10 1646	Rederivation of ax-10 1437 from original version ax-10o 1645. See theorem ax10o 1644 for the derivation of ax-10o 1645 from ax-10 1437. This theorem should not be referenced in any proof. Instead, use ax-10 1437 above so that uses of ax-10 1437 can be more easily identified. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥)
Theorem	hbae 1647	All variables are effectively bound in an identical variable specifier. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	nfae 1648	All variables are effectively bound in an identical variable specifier. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	hbaes 1649	Rule that applies hbae 1647 to antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
Theorem	hbnae 1650	All variables are effectively bound in a distinct variable specifier. Lemma L19 in [Megill] p. 446 (p. 14 of the preprint). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	nfnae 1651	All variables are effectively bound in a distinct variable specifier. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	hbnaes 1652	Rule that applies hbnae 1650 to antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
Theorem	naecoms 1653	A commutation rule for distinct variable specifiers. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑)
Theorem	equs4 1654	Lemma used in proofs of substitution properties. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 20-May-2014.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	equsalh 1655	A useful equivalence related to substitution. New proofs should use equsal 1656 instead. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	equsal 1656	A useful equivalence related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Feb-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	equsex 1657	A useful equivalence related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	equsexd 1658	Deduction form of equsex 1657. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	dral1 1659	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. Part of Theorem 9.4 of [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of preprint). (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-1994.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	dral2 1660	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. Part of Theorem 9.4 of [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of preprint). (Contributed by NM, 27-Feb-2005.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	drex2 1661	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. Part of Theorem 9.4 of [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of preprint). (Contributed by NM, 27-Feb-2005.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	drnf1 1662	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	drnf2 1663	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	spimth 1664	Closed theorem form of spim 1667. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jan-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥((𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) ∧ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	spimt 1665	Closed theorem form of spim 1667. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jan-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 17-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Feb-2018.)
⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	spimh 1666	Specialization, using implicit substitition. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. The spim 1667 series of theorems requires that only one direction of the substitution hypothesis hold. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 8-May-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	spim 1667	Specialization, using implicit substitution. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. The spim 1667 series of theorems requires that only one direction of the substitution hypothesis hold. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 10-Jun-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	spimeh 1668	Existential introduction, using implicit substitition. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	spimed 1669	Deduction version of spime 1670. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Feb-2018.)
⊢ (𝜒 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	spime 1670	Existential introduction, using implicit substitution. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 6-Mar-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	cbv3 1671	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-May-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbv3h 1672	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-May-2018.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbv1 1673	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Revised to format hypotheses to common style. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 13-May-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbv1h 1674	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-May-2018.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbv2h 1675	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbv2 1676	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Revised to align format of hypotheses to common style. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 13-May-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbvalh 1677	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitition. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbval 1678	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbvexh 1679	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitition. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbvex 1680	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	chvar 1681	Implicit substitution of 𝑦 for 𝑥 into a theorem. (Contributed by Raph Levien, 9-Jul-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜓
Theorem	equvini 1682	A variable introduction law for equality. Lemma 15 of [Monk2] p. 109, however we do not require 𝑧 to be distinct from 𝑥 and 𝑦 (making the proof longer). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑧(𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	equveli 1683	A variable elimination law for equality with no distinct variable requirements. (Compare equvini 1682.) (Contributed by NM, 1-Mar-2013.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (∀𝑧(𝑧 = 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	nfald 1684	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑, it is not free in ∀𝑦𝜑. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Sep-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 6-Jan-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	nfexd 1685	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑, it is not free in ∃𝑦𝜑. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Sep-2016.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 7-Feb-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃𝑦𝜓)
1.3.10  Substitution (without distinct variables)
Syntax	wsb 1686	Extend wff definition to include proper substitution (read "the wff that results when 𝑦 is properly substituted for 𝑥 in wff 𝜑"). (Contributed by NM, 24-Jan-2006.)
wff [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Definition	df-sb 1687	Define proper substitution. Remark 9.1 in [Megill] p. 447 (p. 15 of the preprint). For our notation, we use [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 to mean "the wff that results when 𝑦 is properly substituted for 𝑥 in the wff 𝜑." We can also use [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 in place of the "free for" side condition used in traditional predicate calculus; see, for example, stdpc4 1699. Our notation was introduced in Haskell B. Curry's Foundations of Mathematical Logic (1977), p. 316 and is frequently used in textbooks of lambda calculus and combinatory logic. This notation improves the common but ambiguous notation, "𝜑(𝑦) is the wff that results when 𝑦 is properly substituted for 𝑥 in 𝜑(𝑥)." For example, if the original 𝜑(𝑥) is 𝑥 = 𝑦, then 𝜑(𝑦) is 𝑦 = 𝑦, from which we obtain that 𝜑(𝑥) is 𝑥 = 𝑥. So what exactly does 𝜑(𝑥) mean? Curry's notation solves this problem. In most books, proper substitution has a somewhat complicated recursive definition with multiple cases based on the occurrences of free and bound variables in the wff. Instead, we use a single formula that is exactly equivalent and gives us a direct definition. We later prove that our definition has the properties we expect of proper substitution (see theorems sbequ 1762, sbcom2 1905 and sbid2v 1914). Note that our definition is valid even when 𝑥 and 𝑦 are replaced with the same variable, as sbid 1698 shows. We achieve this by having 𝑥 free in the first conjunct and bound in the second. We can also achieve this by using a dummy variable, as the alternate definition dfsb7 1909 shows (which some logicians may prefer because it doesn't mix free and bound variables). Another alternate definition which uses a dummy variable is dfsb7a 1912. When 𝑥 and 𝑦 are distinct, we can express proper substitution with the simpler expressions of sb5 1809 and sb6 1808. In classical logic, another possible definition is (𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ∨ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) but we do not have an intuitionistic proof that this is equivalent. There are no restrictions on any of the variables, including what variables may occur in wff 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ((𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∧ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	sbimi 1688	Infer substitution into antecedent and consequent of an implication. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jun-1998.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)
Theorem	sbbii 1689	Infer substitution into both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)
Theorem	sb1 1690	One direction of a simplified definition of substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	sb2 1691	One direction of a simplified definition of substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sbequ1 1692	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	sbequ2 1693	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜑))
Theorem	stdpc7 1694	One of the two equality axioms of standard predicate calculus, called substitutivity of equality. (The other one is stdpc6 1632.) Translated to traditional notation, it can be read: "𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑(𝑥, 𝑥) → 𝜑(𝑥, 𝑦)), provided that 𝑦 is free for 𝑥 in 𝜑(𝑥, 𝑦)." Axiom 7 of [Mendelson] p. 95. (Contributed by NM, 15-Feb-2005.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 → 𝜑))
Theorem	sbequ12 1695	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	sbequ12r 1696	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 6-Oct-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 21-Jun-2011.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	sbequ12a 1697	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑))
Theorem	sbid 1698	An identity theorem for substitution. Remark 9.1 in [Megill] p. 447 (p. 15 of the preprint). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ([𝑥 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	stdpc4 1699	The specialization axiom of standard predicate calculus. It states that if a statement 𝜑 holds for all 𝑥, then it also holds for the specific case of 𝑦 (properly) substituted for 𝑥. Translated to traditional notation, it can be read: "∀𝑥𝜑(𝑥) → 𝜑(𝑦), provided that 𝑦 is free for 𝑥 in 𝜑(𝑥)." Axiom 4 of [Mendelson] p. 69. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sbh 1700	Substitution for a variable not free in a wff does not affect it. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 17-Oct-2004.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)