ILE Home Intuitionistic Logic Explorer < Previous   Next >
Nearby theorems
Mirrors  >  Home  >  ILE Home  >  Th. List  >  df-sb Unicode version

Definition df-sb 1690
Description: Define proper substitution. Remark 9.1 in [Megill] p. 447 (p. 15 of the preprint). For our notation, we use  [ y  /  x ] ph to mean "the wff that results when  y is properly substituted for  x in the wff  ph." We can also use  [ y  /  x ] ph in place of the "free for" side condition used in traditional predicate calculus; see, for example, stdpc4 1702.

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, " ph ( y ) is the wff that results when  y is properly substituted for  x in  ph ( x )." For example, if the original  ph ( x ) is  x  =  y, then  ph ( y ) is  y  =  y, from which we obtain that  ph ( x ) is  x  =  x. So what exactly does  ph ( 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 1765, sbcom2 1908 and sbid2v 1917).

Note that our definition is valid even when  x and  y are replaced with the same variable, as sbid 1701 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 1912 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 1915.

When  x and  y are distinct, we can express proper substitution with the simpler expressions of sb5 1812 and sb6 1811.

In classical logic, another possible definition is  ( x  =  y  /\  ph )  \/  A. x ( x  =  y  ->  ph ) 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 
ph. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)

Assertion
Ref Expression
df-sb  |-  ( [ y  /  x ] ph 
<->  ( ( x  =  y  ->  ph )  /\  E. x ( x  =  y  /\  ph )
) )

Detailed syntax breakdown of Definition df-sb
StepHypRef Expression
1 wph . . 3  wff  ph
2 vx . . 3  setvar  x
3 vy . . 3  setvar  y
41, 2, 3wsb 1689 . 2  wff  [ y  /  x ] ph
52, 3weq 1435 . . . 4  wff  x  =  y
65, 1wi 4 . . 3  wff  ( x  =  y  ->  ph )
75, 1wa 102 . . . 4  wff  ( x  =  y  /\  ph )
87, 2wex 1424 . . 3  wff  E. x
( x  =  y  /\  ph )
96, 8wa 102 . 2  wff  ( ( x  =  y  ->  ph )  /\  E. x
( x  =  y  /\  ph ) )
104, 9wb 103 1  wff  ( [ y  /  x ] ph 
<->  ( ( x  =  y  ->  ph )  /\  E. x ( x  =  y  /\  ph )
) )
Colors of variables: wff set class
This definition is referenced by:  sbimi  1691  sb1  1693  sb2  1694  sbequ1  1695  sbequ2  1696  drsb1  1724  spsbim  1768  sbequ8  1772  sbidm  1776  sb6  1811  hbsbv  1862
  Copyright terms: Public domain W3C validator