Home | Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 9 of 449) | < 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
(1-28623) |
Hilbert Space Explorer
(28624-30146) |
Users' Mathboxes
(30147-44804) |
Type | Label | Description |
---|---|---|
Statement | ||
Theorem | bitr 801 | Theorem *4.22 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. bitri 276 in closed form. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | biantr 802 | A transitive law of equivalence. Compare Theorem *4.22 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | pm4.14 803 | Theorem *4.14 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. Related to con34b 317. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Oct-2012.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) → ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm3.37 804 | Theorem *3.37 (Transp) of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 112. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Oct-2012.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) → ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) → ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | anim12 805 | Conjoin antecedents and consequents of two premises. This is the closed theorem form of anim12d 608. Theorem *3.47 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 113. It was proved by Leibniz, and it evidently pleased him enough to call it praeclarum theorema (splendid theorem). (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 7-Apr-2013.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | pm3.4 806 | Conjunction implies implication. Theorem *3.4 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 113. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-1995.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | exbiri 807 | Inference form of exbir 40692. This proof is exbiriVD 41068 automatically translated and minimized. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 31-Dec-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jan-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61ian 808 | Elimination of an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 1-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61dan 809 | Elimination of an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 1-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61ddan 810 | Elimination of two antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61dda 811 | Elimination of two antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | mtand 812 | A modus tollens deduction. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 19-Aug-2009.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm2.65da 813 | Deduction for proof by contradiction. (Contributed by NM, 12-Jun-2014.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | condan 814 | Proof by contradiction. (Contributed by NM, 9-Feb-2006.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Jun-2014.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | biadan 815 | An implication is equivalent to the equivalence of some implied equivalence and some other equivalence involving a conjunction. A utility lemma as illustrated in biadanii 818 and elelb 34111. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Mar-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 8-Mar-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)))) | ||
Theorem | biadani 816 | Inference associated with biadan 815. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Mar-2023.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | biadaniALT 817 | Alternate proof of biadani 816 not using biadan 815. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Mar-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | biadanii 818 | Inference associated with biadani 816. Add a conjunction to an equivalence. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 20-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 4-Mar-2023.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.1 819 | Two propositions are equivalent if they are both true. Theorem *5.1 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 123. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1994.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.21 820 | Two propositions are equivalent if they are both false. Theorem *5.21 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1994.) |
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.35 821 | Theorem *5.35 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. Closed form of 2thd 266. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 → 𝜒)) → (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | abai 822 | Introduce one conjunct as an antecedent to the other. "abai" stands for "and, biconditional, and, implication". (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 7-Dec-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ (𝜑 → 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | pm4.45im 823 | Conjunction with implication. Compare Theorem *4.45 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 119. (Contributed by NM, 17-May-1998.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 → 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | impimprbi 824 | An implication and its reverse are equivalent exactly when both operands are equivalent. The right hand side resembles that of dfbi2 475, but ↔ is a weaker operator than ∧. Note that an implication and its reverse can never be simultaneously false, because of pm2.521 177. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Dec-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | nan 825 | Theorem to move a conjunct in and out of a negation. (Contributed by NM, 9-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.31 826 | Theorem *5.31 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | pm5.31r 827 | Variant of pm5.31 826. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 15-Oct-2010.) |
⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → (𝜑 → (𝜒 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | pm4.15 828 | Theorem *4.15 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.36 829 | Theorem *5.36 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ↔ (𝜓 ∧ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | annotanannot 830 | A conjunction with a negated conjunction. (Contributed by AV, 8-Mar-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 1-Apr-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.33 831 | Theorem *5.33 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | syl12anc 832 | Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 1-Aug-2009.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) | ||
Theorem | syl21anc 833 | Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 1-Aug-2009.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) | ||
Theorem | syl22anc 834 | Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by NM, 11-Mar-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜂) | ||
Theorem | syl1111anc 835 | Four-hypothesis elimination deduction for an assertion with a singleton virtual hypothesis collection. Similar to syl112anc 1366 except the unification theorem uses left-nested conjunction. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 17-Oct-2017.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜂) | ||
Theorem | mpsyl4anc 836 | An elimination deduction. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 17-Oct-2017.) |
⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ 𝜒 & ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜂) | ||
Theorem | pm4.87 837 | Theorem *4.87 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Eric Schmidt, 26-Oct-2006.) |
⊢ (((((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))) ∧ ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)))) ∧ ((𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | bimsc1 838 | Removal of conjunct from one side of an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜑))) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | a2and 839 | Deduction distributing a conjunction as embedded antecedent. (Contributed by AV, 25-Oct-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Jan-2020.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜌) → (𝜏 → 𝜃))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜌) → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜏) → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜌) → 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | animpimp2impd 840 | Deduction deriving nested implications from conjunctions. (Contributed by AV, 21-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) → (𝜒 → (𝜃 → 𝜂))) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜃)) → (𝜂 → 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)))) | ||
This section defines disjunction of two formulas, denoted by infix "∨ " and read "or". It is defined in terms of implication and negation, which is possible in classical logic (but not in intuitionistic logic: see iset.mm). This section contains only theorems proved without df-an 397 (theorems that are proved using df-an 397 are deferred to the next section). Basic theorems that help simplifying and applying disjunction are olc 862, orc 861, and orcom 864. As mentioned in the "note on definitions" in the section comment for logical equivalence, all theorems in this and the previous section can be stated in terms of implication and negation only. Additionally, in classical logic (but not in intuitionistic logic: see iset.mm), it is also possible to translate conjunction into disjunction and conversely via the De Morgan law anor 976: conjunction and disjunction are dual connectives. Either is sufficient to develop all propositional calculus of the logic (together with implication and negation). In practice, conjunction is more efficient, its big advantage being the possibility to use it to group antecedents in a convenient way, using imp 407 and ex 413 as noted in the previous section. An illustration of the conservativity of df-an 397 is given by orim12dALT 905, which is an alternate proof of orim12d 958 not using df-an 397. | ||
Syntax | wo 841 | Extend wff definition to include disjunction ("or"). |
wff (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) | ||
Definition | df-or 842 |
Define disjunction (logical "or"). Definition of [Margaris] p. 49. When
the left operand, right operand, or both are true, the result is true;
when both sides are false, the result is false. For example, it is true
that (2 = 3 ∨ 4 = 4) (ex-or 28128). After we define the constant
true ⊤ (df-tru 1531) and the constant false ⊥ (df-fal 1541), we
will be able to prove these truth table values:
((⊤ ∨ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) (truortru 1565), ((⊤ ∨ ⊥)
↔ ⊤)
(truorfal 1566), ((⊥ ∨ ⊤)
↔ ⊤) (falortru 1567), and
((⊥ ∨ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) (falorfal 1568).
Contrast with ∧ (df-an 397), → (wi 4), ⊼ (df-nan 1476), and ⊻ (df-xor 1496). (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1992.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm4.64 843 | Theorem *4.64 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm4.66 844 | Theorem *4.66 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.53 845 | Theorem *2.53 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.54 846 | Theorem *2.54 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | imor 847 | Implication in terms of disjunction. Theorem *4.6 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | imori 848 | Infer disjunction from implication. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | imorri 849 | Infer implication from disjunction. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm4.62 850 | Theorem *4.62 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | jaoi 851 | Inference disjoining the antecedents of two implications. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | jao1i 852 | Add a disjunct in the antecedent of an implication. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 24-Sep-2010.) |
⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | jaod 853 | Deduction disjoining the antecedents of two implications. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃) → 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | mpjaod 854 | Eliminate a disjunction in a deduction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 29-May-2016.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | ori 855 | Infer implication from disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 11-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | orri 856 | Infer disjunction from implication. (Contributed by NM, 11-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | orrd 857 | Deduce disjunction from implication. (Contributed by NM, 27-Nov-1995.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | ord 858 | Deduce implication from disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | orci 859 | Deduction introducing a disjunct. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jan-2008.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | olci 860 | Deduction introducing a disjunct. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jan-2008.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | orc 861 | Introduction of a disjunct. Theorem *2.2 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 104. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | olc 862 | Introduction of a disjunct. Axiom *1.3 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 96. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | pm1.4 863 | Axiom *1.4 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 96. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | orcom 864 | Commutative law for disjunction. Theorem *4.31 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 118. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 15-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | orcomd 865 | Commutation of disjuncts in consequent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Dec-2010.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | unitresl 866 | A lemma for Conjunctive Normal Form unit propagation, in deduction form. (Contributed by Giovanni Mascellani, 15-Sep-2017.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | unitresr 867 | A lemma for Conjunctive Normal Form unit propagation, in deduction form. (Contributed by Giovanni Mascellani, 15-Sep-2017.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | orcoms 868 | Commutation of disjuncts in antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Dec-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜑) → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | orcd 869 | Deduction introducing a disjunct. A translation of natural deduction rule ∨ IR (∨ insertion right), see natded 28110. (Contributed by NM, 20-Sep-2007.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | olcd 870 | Deduction introducing a disjunct. A translation of natural deduction rule ∨ IL (∨ insertion left), see natded 28110. (Contributed by NM, 11-Apr-2008.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | orcs 871 | Deduction eliminating disjunct. Notational convention: We sometimes suffix with "s" the label of an inference that manipulates an antecedent, leaving the consequent unchanged. The "s" means that the inference eliminates the need for a syllogism (syl 17) -type inference in a proof. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | olcs 872 | Deduction eliminating disjunct. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | mtord 873 | A modus tollens deduction involving disjunction. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 15-Jul-2009.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm3.2ni 874 | Infer negated disjunction of negated premises. (Contributed by NM, 4-Apr-1995.) |
⊢ ¬ 𝜑 & ⊢ ¬ 𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ ¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm2.45 875 | Theorem *2.45 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 106. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | pm2.46 876 | Theorem *2.46 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 106. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm2.47 877 | Theorem *2.47 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.48 878 | Theorem *2.48 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.49 879 | Theorem *2.49 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | norbi 880 | If neither of two propositions is true, then these propositions are equivalent. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Apr-2019.) |
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | nbior 881 | If two propositions are not equivalent, then at least one is true. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Apr-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Jan-2020.) |
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | orel1 882 | Elimination of disjunction by denial of a disjunct. Theorem *2.55 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.25 883 | Theorem *2.25 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 104. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | orel2 884 | Elimination of disjunction by denial of a disjunct. Theorem *2.56 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Apr-2013.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜑) → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.67-2 885 | Slight generalization of Theorem *2.67 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.67 886 | Theorem *2.67 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | curryax 887 | A non-intuitionistic positive statement, sometimes called a paradox of material implication. Sometimes called Curry's axiom. Similar to exmid 888 (obtained by substituting ⊥ for 𝜓) but positive. For another non-intuitionistic positive statement, see peirce 203. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2021.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | exmid 888 | Law of excluded middle, also called the principle of tertium non datur. Theorem *2.11 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. It says that something is either true or not true; there are no in-between values of truth. This is an essential distinction of our classical logic and is not a theorem of intuitionistic logic. In intuitionistic logic, if this statement is true for some 𝜑, then 𝜑 is decidable. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1992.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | exmidd 889 | Law of excluded middle in a context. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.1 890 | Theorem *2.1 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | pm2.13 891 | Theorem *2.13 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ ¬ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | pm2.621 892 | Theorem *2.621 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.62 893 | Theorem *2.62 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.68 894 | Theorem *2.68 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | dfor2 895 | Logical 'or' expressed in terms of implication only. Theorem *5.25 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-2004.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Oct-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.07 896 | Theorem *2.07 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | pm1.2 897 | Axiom *1.2 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 96, which they call "Taut". (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜑) → 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | oridm 898 | Idempotent law for disjunction. Theorem *4.25 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 16-Apr-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Mar-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | pm4.25 899 | Theorem *4.25 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.4 900 | Theorem *2.4 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 106. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) |
< Previous Next > |
Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |