Home | Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 3 of 450) | < Previous Next > |
Bad symbols? Try the
GIF version. |
||
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > MPE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
Color key: | Metamath Proof Explorer
(1-28697) |
Hilbert Space Explorer
(28698-30220) |
Users' Mathboxes
(30221-44913) |
Type | Label | Description |
---|---|---|
Statement | ||
Theorem | mtoi 201 | Modus tollens inference. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jul-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 15-Sep-2012.) |
⊢ ¬ 𝜒 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | mt2 202 | A rule similar to modus tollens. Inference associated with con2i 141. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Sep-2013.) |
⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | mt3 203 | A rule similar to modus tollens. Inference associated with con1i 149. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 11-Sep-2013.) |
⊢ ¬ 𝜓 & ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | peirce 204 | Peirce's axiom. A non-intuitionistic implication-only statement. Added to intuitionistic (implicational) propositional calculus, it gives classical (implicational) propositional calculus. For another non-intuitionistic positive statement, see curryax 890. When ⊥ is substituted for 𝜓, then this becomes the Clavius law pm2.18 128. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1992.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 9-Oct-2012.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜑) → 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | looinv 205 | The Inversion Axiom of the infinite-valued sentential logic (L-infinity) of Lukasiewicz. Using dfor2 898, we can see that this essentially expresses "disjunction commutes". Theorem *2.69 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. It is a special instance of the axiom "Roll", see peirceroll 85. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-2004.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓) → ((𝜓 → 𝜑) → 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | bijust0 206 | A self-implication (see id 22) does not imply its own negation. The justification theorem bijust 207 is one of its instances. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1999.) (Proof shortened by Josh Purinton, 29-Dec-2000.) Extract bijust0 206 from proof of bijust 207. (Revised by BJ, 19-Mar-2020.) |
⊢ ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜑) → ¬ (𝜑 → 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | bijust 207 | Theorem used to justify the definition of the biconditional df-bi 209. Instance of bijust0 206. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1999.) |
⊢ ¬ ((¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑)) → ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑))) → ¬ (¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑)) → ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑)))) | ||
The definition df-bi 209 in this section is our first definition, which introduces and defines the biconditional connective ↔ used to denote logical equivalence. We define a wff of the form (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) as an abbreviation for ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑)). Unlike most traditional developments, we have chosen not to have a separate symbol such as "Df." to mean "is defined as". Instead, we will later use the biconditional connective for this purpose (df-an 399 is its first use), as it allows us to use logic to manipulate definitions directly. This greatly simplifies many proofs since it eliminates the need for a separate mechanism for introducing and eliminating definitions. A note on definitions: definitions are required to be eliminable (that is, a theorem stated in terms of the defined symbol can also be stated without it) and conservative (that is, a theorem whose statement does not contain the defined symbol can be proved without using that definition). This means that a definition does not increase the expressive power nor the deductive power, respectively, of a theory. On the other hand, definitions are often useful to write shorter proofs, so in (i)set.mm we will generally not try to avoid them. This is why, for instance, some theorems which do not contain disjunction in their statement are placed after the section on disjunction because a shorter proof using disjunction is possible. | ||
Syntax | wb 208 | Extend wff definition to include the biconditional connective. |
wff (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
Definition | df-bi 209 |
Define the biconditional (logical "iff" or "if and only
if").
The definition df-bi 209 in this section is our first definition, which introduces and defines the biconditional connective ↔. We define a wff of the form (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) as an abbreviation for ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑)). Unlike most traditional developments, we have chosen not to have a separate symbol such as "Df." to mean "is defined as". Instead, we will later use the biconditional connective for this purpose (df-or 844 is its first use), as it allows us to use logic to manipulate definitions directly. This greatly simplifies many proofs since it eliminates the need for a separate mechanism for introducing and eliminating definitions. Of course, we cannot use this mechanism to define the biconditional itself, since it hasn't been introduced yet. Instead, we use a more general form of definition, described as follows. In its most general form, a definition is simply an assertion that introduces a new symbol (or a new combination of existing symbols, as in df-3an 1085) that is eliminable and does not strengthen the existing language. The latter requirement means that the set of provable statements not containing the new symbol (or new combination) should remain exactly the same after the definition is introduced. Our definition of the biconditional may look unusual compared to most definitions, but it strictly satisfies these requirements. The justification for our definition is that if we mechanically replace (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) (the definiendum i.e. the thing being defined) with ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑)) (the definiens i.e. the defining expression) in the definition, the definition becomes the previously proved theorem bijust 207. It is impossible to use df-bi 209 to prove any statement expressed in the original language that can't be proved from the original axioms, because if we simply replace each instance of df-bi 209 in the proof with the corresponding bijust 207 instance, we will end up with a proof from the original axioms. Note that from Metamath's point of view, a definition is just another axiom - i.e. an assertion we claim to be true - but from our high level point of view, we are not strengthening the language. To indicate this fact, we prefix definition labels with "df-" instead of "ax-". (This prefixing is an informal convention that means nothing to the Metamath proof verifier; it is just a naming convention for human readability.) After we define the constant true ⊤ (df-tru 1540) and the constant false ⊥ (df-fal 1550), we will be able to prove these truth table values: ((⊤ ↔ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) (trubitru 1566), ((⊤ ↔ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) (trubifal 1568), ((⊥ ↔ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) (falbitru 1567), and ((⊥ ↔ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) (falbifal 1569). See dfbi1 215, dfbi2 477, and dfbi3 1044 for theorems suggesting typical textbook definitions of ↔, showing that our definition has the properties we expect. Theorem dfbi1 215 is particularly useful if we want to eliminate ↔ from an expression to convert it to primitives. Theorem dfbi 478 shows this definition rewritten in an abbreviated form after conjunction is introduced, for easier understanding. Contrast with ∨ (df-or 844), → (wi 4), ⊼ (df-nan 1482), and ⊻ (df-xor 1502). In some sense ↔ returns true if two truth values are equal; = (df-cleq 2816) returns true if two classes are equal. (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1992.) |
⊢ ¬ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑))) → ¬ (¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑)) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | impbi 210 | Property of the biconditional connective. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1999.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜓 → 𝜑) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | impbii 211 | Infer an equivalence from an implication and its converse. Inference associated with impbi 210. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1992.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | impbidd 212 | Deduce an equivalence from two implications. Double deduction associated with impbi 210 and impbii 211. Deduction associated with impbid 214. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 12-Oct-2010.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | impbid21d 213 | Deduce an equivalence from two implications. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 12-May-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | impbid 214 | Deduce an equivalence from two implications. Deduction associated with impbi 210 and impbii 211. (Contributed by NM, 24-Jan-1993.) Revised to prove it from impbid21d 213. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 3-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | dfbi1 215 | Relate the biconditional connective to primitive connectives. See dfbi1ALT 216 for an unusual version proved directly from axioms. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1992.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | dfbi1ALT 216 | Alternate proof of dfbi1 215. This proof, discovered by Gregory Bush on 8-Mar-2004, has several curious properties. First, it has only 17 steps directly from the axioms and df-bi 209, compared to over 800 steps were the proof of dfbi1 215 expanded into axioms. Second, step 2 demands only the property of "true"; any axiom (or theorem) could be used. It might be thought, therefore, that it is in some sense redundant, but in fact no proof is shorter than this (measured by number of steps). Third, it illustrates how intermediate steps can "blow up" in size even in short proofs. Fourth, the compressed proof is only 182 bytes (or 17 bytes in D-proof notation), but the generated web page is over 200kB with intermediate steps that are essentially incomprehensible to humans (other than Gregory Bush). If there were an obfuscated code contest for proofs, this would be a contender. This "blowing up" and incomprehensibility of the intermediate steps vividly demonstrate the advantages of using many layered intermediate theorems, since each theorem is easier to understand. (Contributed by Gregory Bush, 10-Mar-2004.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | biimp 217 | Property of the biconditional connective. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1999.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | biimpi 218 | Infer an implication from a logical equivalence. Inference associated with biimp 217. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1992.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | sylbi 219 | A mixed syllogism inference from a biconditional and an implication. Useful for substituting an antecedent with a definition. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | sylib 220 | A mixed syllogism inference from an implication and a biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | sylbb 221 | A mixed syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Mar-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | biimpr 222 | Property of the biconditional connective. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1999.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 11-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (𝜓 → 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | bicom1 223 | Commutative law for the biconditional. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 10-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | bicom 224 | Commutative law for the biconditional. Theorem *4.21 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | bicomd 225 | Commute two sides of a biconditional in a deduction. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | bicomi 226 | Inference from commutative law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | impbid1 227 | Infer an equivalence from two implications. (Contributed by NM, 6-Mar-2007.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | impbid2 228 | Infer an equivalence from two implications. (Contributed by NM, 6-Mar-2007.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Sep-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | impcon4bid 229 | A variation on impbid 214 with contraposition. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 3-Jul-2009.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → ¬ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | biimpri 230 | Infer a converse implication from a logical equivalence. Inference associated with biimpr 222. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1992.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 16-Sep-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | biimpd 231 | Deduce an implication from a logical equivalence. Deduction associated with biimp 217 and biimpi 218. (Contributed by NM, 11-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | mpbi 232 | An inference from a biconditional, related to modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) |
⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜓 | ||
Theorem | mpbir 233 | An inference from a biconditional, related to modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 28-Dec-1992.) |
⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | mpbid 234 | A deduction from a biconditional, related to modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | mpbii 235 | An inference from a nested biconditional, related to modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Oct-2012.) |
⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | sylibr 236 | A mixed syllogism inference from an implication and a biconditional. Useful for substituting a consequent with a definition. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | sylbir 237 | A mixed syllogism inference from a biconditional and an implication. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | sylbbr 238 |
A mixed syllogism inference from two biconditionals.
Note on the various syllogism-like statements in set.mm. The hypothetical syllogism syl 17 infers an implication from two implications (and there are 3syl 18 and 4syl 19 for chaining more inferences). There are four inferences inferring an implication from one implication and one biconditional: sylbi 219, sylib 220, sylbir 237, sylibr 236; four inferences inferring an implication from two biconditionals: sylbb 221, sylbbr 238, sylbb1 239, sylbb2 240; four inferences inferring a biconditional from two biconditionals: bitri 277, bitr2i 278, bitr3i 279, bitr4i 280 (and more for chaining more biconditionals). There are also closed forms and deduction versions of these, like, among many others, syld 47, syl5 34, syl6 35, mpbid 234, bitrd 281, syl5bb 285, syl6bb 289 and variants. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Apr-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | sylbb1 239 | A mixed syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Apr-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | sylbb2 240 | A mixed syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Apr-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | sylibd 241 | A syllogism deduction. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | sylbid 242 | A syllogism deduction. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | mpbidi 243 | A deduction from a biconditional, related to modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 9-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜃 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜃 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | syl5bi 244 | A mixed syllogism inference from a nested implication and a biconditional. Useful for substituting an embedded antecedent with a definition. (Contributed by NM, 12-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl5bir 245 | A mixed syllogism inference from a nested implication and a biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl5ib 246 | A mixed syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 12-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl5ibcom 247 | A mixed syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jun-2007.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl5ibr 248 | A mixed syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | syl5ibrcom 249 | A mixed syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 20-Jun-2007.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | biimprd 250 | Deduce a converse implication from a logical equivalence. Deduction associated with biimpr 222 and biimpri 230. (Contributed by NM, 11-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 22-Sep-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | biimpcd 251 | Deduce a commuted implication from a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-May-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 22-Sep-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | biimprcd 252 | Deduce a converse commuted implication from a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-May-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | syl6ib 253 | A mixed syllogism inference from a nested implication and a biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl6ibr 254 | A mixed syllogism inference from a nested implication and a biconditional. Useful for substituting an embedded consequent with a definition. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl6bi 255 | A mixed syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl6bir 256 | A mixed syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl7bi 257 | A mixed syllogism inference from a doubly nested implication and a biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜃 → (𝜓 → 𝜏))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜃 → (𝜑 → 𝜏))) | ||
Theorem | syl8ib 258 | A syllogism rule of inference. The second premise is used to replace the consequent of the first premise. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃))) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜏))) | ||
Theorem | mpbird 259 | A deduction from a biconditional, related to modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | mpbiri 260 | An inference from a nested biconditional, related to modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Oct-2012.) |
⊢ 𝜒 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | sylibrd 261 | A syllogism deduction. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | sylbird 262 | A syllogism deduction. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | biid 263 | Principle of identity for logical equivalence. Theorem *4.2 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. This is part of Frege's eighth axiom per Proposition 54 of [Frege1879] p. 50; see also eqid 2823. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | biidd 264 | Principle of identity with antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-1995.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.1im 265 | Two propositions are equivalent if they are both true. Closed form of 2th 266. Equivalent to a biimp 217-like version of the xor-connective. This theorem stays true, no matter how you permute its operands. This is evident from its sharper version (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))). (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 12-May-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | 2th 266 | Two truths are equivalent. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ 𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | 2thd 267 | Two truths are equivalent. Deduction form. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jun-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | monothetic 268 | Two self-implications (see id 22) are equivalent. This theorem, rather trivial in our axiomatization, is (the biconditional form of) a standard axiom for monothetic BCI logic. This is the most general theorem of which trujust 1539 is an instance. Relatedly, this would be the justification theorem if the definition of ⊤ were dftru2 1542. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Sep-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜑) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | ibi 269 | Inference that converts a biconditional implied by one of its arguments, into an implication. (Contributed by NM, 17-Oct-2003.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ibir 270 | Inference that converts a biconditional implied by one of its arguments, into an implication. (Contributed by NM, 22-Jul-2004.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ibd 271 | Deduction that converts a biconditional implied by one of its arguments, into an implication. Deduction associated with ibi 269. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jun-2004.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.74 272 | Distribution of implication over biconditional. Theorem *5.74 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 126. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 11-Apr-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | pm5.74i 273 | Distribution of implication over biconditional (inference form). (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.74ri 274 | Distribution of implication over biconditional (reverse inference form). (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.74d 275 | Distribution of implication over biconditional (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Mar-1996.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | pm5.74rd 276 | Distribution of implication over biconditional (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 19-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜃))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | bitri 277 | An inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Oct-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | bitr2i 278 | An inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | bitr3i 279 | An inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | bitr4i 280 | An inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | bitrd 281 | Deduction form of bitri 277. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Apr-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | bitr2d 282 | Deduction form of bitr2i 278. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jun-2004.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | bitr3d 283 | Deduction form of bitr3i 279. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | bitr4d 284 | Deduction form of bitr4i 280. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl5bb 285 | A syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl5rbb 286 | A syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | syl5bbr 287 | A syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl5rbbr 288 | A syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | syl6bb 289 | A syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl6rbb 290 | A syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | syl6bbr 291 | A syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | syl6rbbr 292 | A syllogism inference from two biconditionals. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | 3imtr3i 293 | A mixed syllogism inference, useful for removing a definition from both sides of an implication. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | 3imtr4i 294 | A mixed syllogism inference, useful for applying a definition to both sides of an implication. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | 3imtr3d 295 | More general version of 3imtr3i 293. Useful for converting conditional definitions in a formula. (Contributed by NM, 8-Apr-1996.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) | ||
Theorem | 3imtr4d 296 | More general version of 3imtr4i 294. Useful for converting conditional definitions in a formula. (Contributed by NM, 26-Oct-1995.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) | ||
Theorem | 3imtr3g 297 | More general version of 3imtr3i 293. Useful for converting definitions in a formula. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-1996.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) | ||
Theorem | 3imtr4g 298 | More general version of 3imtr4i 294. Useful for converting definitions in a formula. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-1996.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) | ||
Theorem | 3bitri 299 | A chained inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | 3bitrri 300 | A chained inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2006.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑) |
< Previous Next > |
Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |