Theorem dfexdc 1435

Description: Defining E. x ph given decidability. It is common in classical logic to define E. x ph as -. A. x -. ph but in intuitionistic logic without a decidability condition, that is only an implication not an equivalence, as seen at exalim 1436. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 15-Mar-2018.)

Assertion

Ref	Expression
dfexdc	|- (DECID E. x ph -> ( E. x ph <-> -. A. x -. ph ) )

Proof of Theorem dfexdc

Step	Hyp	Ref	Expression
1		alnex 1433	. . 3 |- ( A. x -. ph <-> -. E. x ph )
2	1	a1i 9	. 2 |- (DECID E. x ph -> ( A. x -. ph <-> -. E. x ph ) )
3	2	con2biidc 811	1 |- (DECID E. x ph -> ( E. x ph <-> -. A. x -. ph ) )

Syntax hints:   -. wn 3   -> wi 4   <-> wb 103  DECID wdc 780   A.wal 1287   E.wex 1426

This theorem was proved from axioms:  ax-1 5  ax-2 6  ax-mp 7  ax-ia1 104  ax-ia2 105  ax-ia3 106  ax-in1 579  ax-in2 580  ax-io 665  ax-5 1381  ax-gen 1383  ax-ie2 1428

This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 115  df-dc 781  df-tru 1292  df-fal 1295

This theorem is referenced by:  dfrex2dc  2371