P. 14 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 1301-1400   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	3jao 1301	Disjunction of 3 antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 8-Apr-1994.)
|- ( ( ( ph -> ps ) /\ ( ch -> ps ) /\ ( th -> ps ) ) -> ( ( ph \/ ch \/ th ) -> ps ) )
Theorem	3jaob 1302	Disjunction of 3 antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 13-Sep-2011.)
|- ( ( ( ph \/ ch \/ th ) -> ps ) <-> ( ( ph -> ps ) /\ ( ch -> ps ) /\ ( th -> ps ) ) )
Theorem	3jaoi 1303	Disjunction of 3 antecedents (inference). (Contributed by NM, 12-Sep-1995.)
|- ( ph -> ps )   &    |- ( ch -> ps )   &    |- ( th -> ps )   =>    |- ( ( ph \/ ch \/ th ) -> ps )
Theorem	3jaod 1304	Disjunction of 3 antecedents (deduction). (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2005.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps -> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( th -> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( ta -> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps \/ th \/ ta ) -> ch ) )
Theorem	3jaoian 1305	Disjunction of 3 antecedents (inference). (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2005.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> ch )   &    |- ( ( th /\ ps ) -> ch )   &    |- ( ( ta /\ ps ) -> ch )   =>    |- ( ( ( ph \/ th \/ ta ) /\ ps ) -> ch )
Theorem	3jaodan 1306	Disjunction of 3 antecedents (deduction). (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2005.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> ch )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ th ) -> ch )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ta ) -> ch )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ( ps \/ th \/ ta ) ) -> ch )
Theorem	mpjao3dan 1307	Eliminate a 3-way disjunction in a deduction. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 13-Apr-2018.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> ch )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ th ) -> ch )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ta ) -> ch )   &    |- ( ph -> ( ps \/ th \/ ta ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ch )
Theorem	3jaao 1308	Inference conjoining and disjoining the antecedents of three implications. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 15-Aug-2009.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps -> ch ) )   &    |- ( th -> ( ta -> ch ) )   &    |- ( et -> ( ze -> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ th /\ et ) -> ( ( ps \/ ta \/ ze ) -> ch ) )
Theorem	3ianorr 1309	Triple disjunction implies negated triple conjunction. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Dec-2018.)
|- ( ( -. ph \/ -. ps \/ -. ch ) -> -. ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) )
Theorem	syl3an9b 1310	Nested syllogism inference conjoining 3 dissimilar antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 1-May-1995.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   &    |- ( th -> ( ch <-> ta ) )   &    |- ( et -> ( ta <-> ze ) )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ th /\ et ) -> ( ps <-> ze ) )
Theorem	3orbi123d 1311	Deduction joining 3 equivalences to form equivalence of disjunctions. (Contributed by NM, 20-Apr-1994.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( th <-> ta ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( et <-> ze ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps \/ th \/ et ) <-> ( ch \/ ta \/ ze ) ) )
Theorem	3anbi123d 1312	Deduction joining 3 equivalences to form equivalence of conjunctions. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( th <-> ta ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( et <-> ze ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps /\ th /\ et ) <-> ( ch /\ ta /\ ze ) ) )
Theorem	3anbi12d 1313	Deduction conjoining and adding a conjunct to equivalences. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( th <-> ta ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps /\ th /\ et ) <-> ( ch /\ ta /\ et ) ) )
Theorem	3anbi13d 1314	Deduction conjoining and adding a conjunct to equivalences. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( th <-> ta ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps /\ et /\ th ) <-> ( ch /\ et /\ ta ) ) )
Theorem	3anbi23d 1315	Deduction conjoining and adding a conjunct to equivalences. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( th <-> ta ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( et /\ ps /\ th ) <-> ( et /\ ch /\ ta ) ) )
Theorem	3anbi1d 1316	Deduction adding conjuncts to an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps /\ th /\ ta ) <-> ( ch /\ th /\ ta ) ) )
Theorem	3anbi2d 1317	Deduction adding conjuncts to an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( th /\ ps /\ ta ) <-> ( th /\ ch /\ ta ) ) )
Theorem	3anbi3d 1318	Deduction adding conjuncts to an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( th /\ ta /\ ps ) <-> ( th /\ ta /\ ch ) ) )
Theorem	3anim123d 1319	Deduction joining 3 implications to form implication of conjunctions. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps -> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( th -> ta ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( et -> ze ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps /\ th /\ et ) -> ( ch /\ ta /\ ze ) ) )
Theorem	3orim123d 1320	Deduction joining 3 implications to form implication of disjunctions. (Contributed by NM, 4-Apr-1997.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps -> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( th -> ta ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( et -> ze ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps \/ th \/ et ) -> ( ch \/ ta \/ ze ) ) )
Theorem	an6 1321	Rearrangement of 6 conjuncts. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.)
|- ( ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) /\ ( th /\ ta /\ et ) ) <-> ( ( ph /\ th ) /\ ( ps /\ ta ) /\ ( ch /\ et ) ) )
Theorem	3an6 1322	Analog of an4 586 for triple conjunction. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
|- ( ( ( ph /\ ps ) /\ ( ch /\ th ) /\ ( ta /\ et ) ) <-> ( ( ph /\ ch /\ ta ) /\ ( ps /\ th /\ et ) ) )
Theorem	3or6 1323	Analog of or4 771 for triple conjunction. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2011.)
|- ( ( ( ph \/ ps ) \/ ( ch \/ th ) \/ ( ta \/ et ) ) <-> ( ( ph \/ ch \/ ta ) \/ ( ps \/ th \/ et ) ) )
Theorem	mp3an1 1324	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 21-Nov-1994.)
|- ph   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )   =>    |- ( ( ps /\ ch ) -> th )
Theorem	mp3an2 1325	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 21-Nov-1994.)
|- ps   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ch ) -> th )
Theorem	mp3an3 1326	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 21-Nov-1994.)
|- ch   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> th )
Theorem	mp3an12 1327	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jul-2005.)
|- ph   &    |- ps   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )   =>    |- ( ch -> th )
Theorem	mp3an13 1328	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 14-Jul-2005.)
|- ph   &    |- ch   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )   =>    |- ( ps -> th )
Theorem	mp3an23 1329	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 14-Jul-2005.)
|- ps   &    |- ch   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )   =>    |- ( ph -> th )
Theorem	mp3an1i 1330	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jul-2005.)
|- ps   &    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps /\ ch /\ th ) -> ta ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ch /\ th ) -> ta ) )
Theorem	mp3anl1 1331	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.)
|- ph   &    |- ( ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) /\ th ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ( ( ps /\ ch ) /\ th ) -> ta )
Theorem	mp3anl2 1332	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.)
|- ps   &    |- ( ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) /\ th ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ( ( ph /\ ch ) /\ th ) -> ta )
Theorem	mp3anl3 1333	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.)
|- ch   &    |- ( ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) /\ th ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ( ( ph /\ ps ) /\ th ) -> ta )
Theorem	mp3anr1 1334	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2006.)
|- ps   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ( ps /\ ch /\ th ) ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ( ch /\ th ) ) -> ta )
Theorem	mp3anr2 1335	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-2006.)
|- ch   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ( ps /\ ch /\ th ) ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ( ps /\ th ) ) -> ta )
Theorem	mp3anr3 1336	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 19-Oct-2007.)
|- th   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ( ps /\ ch /\ th ) ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ( ps /\ ch ) ) -> ta )
Theorem	mp3an 1337	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1999.)
|- ph   &    |- ps   &    |- ch   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )   =>    |- th
Theorem	mpd3an3 1338	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 8-Nov-2007.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> ch )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> th )
Theorem	mpd3an23 1339	An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 4-Dec-2006.)
|- ( ph -> ps )   &    |- ( ph -> ch )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )   =>    |- ( ph -> th )
Theorem	mp3and 1340	A deduction based on modus ponens. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.)
|- ( ph -> ps )   &    |- ( ph -> ch )   &    |- ( ph -> th )   &    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps /\ ch /\ th ) -> ta ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ta )
Theorem	mp3an12i 1341	mp3an 1337 with antecedents in standard conjunction form and with one hypothesis an implication. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Aug-2016.)
|- ph   &    |- ps   &    |- ( ch -> th )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ th ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ch -> ta )
Theorem	mp3an2i 1342	mp3an 1337 with antecedents in standard conjunction form and with two hypotheses which are implications. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Aug-2016.)
|- ph   &    |- ( ps -> ch )   &    |- ( ps -> th )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ch /\ th ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ps -> ta )
Theorem	mp3an3an 1343	mp3an 1337 with antecedents in standard conjunction form and with two hypotheses which are implications. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Aug-2016.)
|- ph   &    |- ( ps -> ch )   &    |- ( th -> ta )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ch /\ ta ) -> et )   =>    |- ( ( ps /\ th ) -> et )
Theorem	mp3an2ani 1344	An elimination deduction. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 17-Oct-2017.)
|- ph   &    |- ( ps -> ch )   &    |- ( ( ps /\ th ) -> ta )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ch /\ ta ) -> et )   =>    |- ( ( ps /\ th ) -> et )
Theorem	biimp3a 1345	Infer implication from a logical equivalence. Similar to biimpa 296. (Contributed by NM, 4-Sep-2005.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> ( ch <-> th ) )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) -> th )
Theorem	biimp3ar 1346	Infer implication from a logical equivalence. Similar to biimpar 297. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2009.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> ( ch <-> th ) )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ps /\ th ) -> ch )
Theorem	3anandis 1347	Inference that undistributes a triple conjunction in the antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 18-Apr-2007.)
|- ( ( ( ph /\ ps ) /\ ( ph /\ ch ) /\ ( ph /\ th ) ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ( ps /\ ch /\ th ) ) -> ta )
Theorem	3anandirs 1348	Inference that undistributes a triple conjunction in the antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jul-2006.) (Revised by NM, 18-Apr-2007.)
|- ( ( ( ph /\ th ) /\ ( ps /\ th ) /\ ( ch /\ th ) ) -> ta )   =>    |- ( ( ( ph /\ ps /\ ch ) /\ th ) -> ta )
Theorem	ecased 1349	Deduction form of disjunctive syllogism. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 9-Dec-2017.)
|- ( ph -> -. ch )   &    |- ( ph -> ( ps \/ ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ps )
Theorem	ecase23d 1350	Variation of ecased 1349 with three disjuncts instead of two. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.) (Revised by Jim Kingdon, 9-Dec-2017.)
|- ( ph -> -. ch )   &    |- ( ph -> -. th )   &    |- ( ph -> ( ps \/ ch \/ th ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ps )
1.2.12  True and false constants
1.2.12.1  Universal quantifier for use by df-tru Even though it is not ordinarily part of propositional calculus, the universal quantifier A. is introduced here so that the soundness of Definition df-tru 1356 can be checked by the same algorithm that is used for predicate calculus. Its first real use is in Axiom ax-5 1445 in the predicate calculus section below. For those who want propositional calculus to be self-contained, i.e., to use wff variables only, the alternate Definition dftru2 1361 may be adopted and this subsection moved down to the start of the subsection with wex 1490 below. However, the use of dftru2 1361 as a definition requires a more elaborate definition checking algorithm that we prefer to avoid.
Syntax	wal 1351	Extend wff definition to include the universal quantifier ("for all"). A. x ph is read " ph (phi) is true for all x". Typically, in its final application ph would be replaced with a wff containing a (free) occurrence of the variable x, for example x = y. In a universe with a finite number of objects, "for all" is equivalent to a big conjunction (AND) with one wff for each possible case of x. When the universe is infinite (as with set theory), such a propositional-calculus equivalent is not possible because an infinitely long formula has no meaning, but conceptually the idea is the same.
wff A. x ph
1.2.12.2  Equality predicate for use by df-tru Even though it is not ordinarily part of propositional calculus, the equality predicate = is introduced here so that the soundness of definition df-tru 1356 can be checked by the same algorithm as is used for predicate calculus. Its first real use is in Axiom ax-8 1502 in the predicate calculus section below. For those who want propositional calculus to be self-contained, i.e., to use wff variables only, the alternate definition dftru2 1361 may be adopted and this subsection moved down to just above weq 1501 below. However, the use of dftru2 1361 as a definition requires a more elaborate definition checking algorithm that we prefer to avoid.
Syntax	cv 1352	This syntax construction states that a variable x, which has been declared to be a setvar variable by $f statement vx, is also a class expression. This can be justified informally as follows. We know that the class builder { y | y e. x } is a class by cab 2161. Since (when y is distinct from x) we have x = { y | y e. x } by cvjust 2170, we can argue that the syntax " class x " can be viewed as an abbreviation for " class { y | y e. x }". See the discussion under the definition of class in [Jech] p. 4 showing that "Every set can be considered to be a class." While it is tempting and perhaps occasionally useful to view cv 1352 as a "type conversion" from a setvar variable to a class variable, keep in mind that cv 1352 is intrinsically no different from any other class-building syntax such as cab 2161, cun 3125, or c0 3420. For a general discussion of the theory of classes and the role of cv 1352, see https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmset.html#class 1352. (The description above applies to set theory, not predicate calculus. The purpose of introducing class x here, and not in set theory where it belongs, is to allow us to express i.e. "prove" the weq 1501 of predicate calculus from the wceq 1353 of set theory, so that we don't overload the = connective with two syntax definitions. This is done to prevent ambiguity that would complicate some Metamath parsers.)
class x
Syntax	wceq 1353	Extend wff definition to include class equality. For a general discussion of the theory of classes, see https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmset.html#class. (The purpose of introducing wff A = B here, and not in set theory where it belongs, is to allow us to express i.e. "prove" the weq 1501 of predicate calculus in terms of the wceq 1353 of set theory, so that we don't "overload" the = connective with two syntax definitions. This is done to prevent ambiguity that would complicate some Metamath parsers. For example, some parsers - although not the Metamath program - stumble on the fact that the = in x = y could be the = of either weq 1501 or wceq 1353, although mathematically it makes no difference. The class variables A and B are introduced temporarily for the purpose of this definition but otherwise not used in predicate calculus. See df-cleq 2168 for more information on the set theory usage of wceq 1353.)
wff A = B
1.2.12.3  Define the true and false constants
Syntax	wtru 1354	T. is a wff.
wff T.
Theorem	trujust 1355	Soundness justification theorem for df-tru 1356. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2013.) (Revised by NM, 11-Jul-2019.)
|- ( ( A. x x = x -> A. x x = x ) <-> ( A. y y = y -> A. y y = y ) )
Definition	df-tru 1356	Definition of the truth value "true", or "verum", denoted by T.. This is a tautology, as proved by tru 1357. In this definition, an instance of id 19 is used as the definiens, although any tautology, such as an axiom, can be used in its place. This particular id 19 instance was chosen so this definition can be checked by the same algorithm that is used for predicate calculus. This definition should be referenced directly only by tru 1357, and other proofs should depend on tru 1357 (directly or indirectly) instead of this definition, since there are many alternate ways to define T.. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 13-Oct-2010.) (Revised by NM, 11-Jul-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.)
|- ( T. <-> ( A. x x = x -> A. x x = x ) )
Theorem	tru 1357	The truth value T. is provable. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 13-Oct-2010.)
|- T.
Syntax	wfal 1358	F. is a wff.
wff F.
Definition	df-fal 1359	Definition of the truth value "false", or "falsum", denoted by F.. See also df-tru 1356. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.)
|- ( F. <-> -. T. )
Theorem	fal 1360	The truth value F. is refutable. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Mel L. O'Cat, 11-Mar-2012.)
|- -. F.
Theorem	dftru2 1361	An alternate definition of "true". (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 13-Oct-2010.) (Revised by BJ, 12-Jul-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.)
|- ( T. <-> ( ph -> ph ) )
Theorem	mptru 1362	Eliminate T. as an antecedent. A proposition implied by T. is true. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 13-Mar-2014.)
|- ( T. -> ph )   =>    |- ph
Theorem	tbtru 1363	A proposition is equivalent to itself being equivalent to T.. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 14-Aug-2011.)
|- ( ph <-> ( ph <-> T. ) )
Theorem	nbfal 1364	The negation of a proposition is equivalent to itself being equivalent to F.. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 14-Aug-2011.)
|- ( -. ph <-> ( ph <-> F. ) )
Theorem	bitru 1365	A theorem is equivalent to truth. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-May-2015.)
|- ph   =>    |- ( ph <-> T. )
Theorem	bifal 1366	A contradiction is equivalent to falsehood. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-May-2015.)
|- -. ph   =>    |- ( ph <-> F. )
Theorem	falim 1367	The truth value F. implies anything. Also called the principle of explosion, or "ex falso quodlibet". (Contributed by FL, 20-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by Anthony Hart, 1-Aug-2011.)
|- ( F. -> ph )
Theorem	falimd 1368	The truth value F. implies anything. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.)
|- ( ( ph /\ F. ) -> ps )
Theorem	a1tru 1369	Anything implies T.. (Contributed by FL, 20-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by Anthony Hart, 1-Aug-2011.)
|- ( ph -> T. )
Theorem	truan 1370	True can be removed from a conjunction. (Contributed by FL, 20-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jul-2019.)
|- ( ( T. /\ ph ) <-> ph )
Theorem	dfnot 1371	Given falsum, we can define the negation of a wff ph as the statement that a contradiction follows from assuming ph. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jul-2019.)
|- ( -. ph <-> ( ph -> F. ) )
Theorem	inegd 1372	Negation introduction rule from natural deduction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> F. )   =>    |- ( ph -> -. ps )
Theorem	pm2.21fal 1373	If a wff and its negation are provable, then falsum is provable. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.)
|- ( ph -> ps )   &    |- ( ph -> -. ps )   =>    |- ( ph -> F. )
Theorem	pclem6 1374	Negation inferred from embedded conjunct. (Contributed by NM, 20-Aug-1993.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 4-May-2018.)
|- ( ( ph <-> ( ps /\ -. ph ) ) -> -. ps )
1.2.13  Logical 'xor'
Syntax	wxo 1375	Extend wff definition to include exclusive disjunction ('xor').
wff ( ph \/_ ps )
Definition	df-xor 1376	Define exclusive disjunction (logical 'xor'). Return true if either the left or right, but not both, are true. Contrast with /\ (wa 104), \/ (wo 708), and -> (wi 4) . (Contributed by FL, 22-Nov-2010.) (Modified by Jim Kingdon, 1-Mar-2018.)
|- ( ( ph \/_ ps ) <-> ( ( ph \/ ps ) /\ -. ( ph /\ ps ) ) )
Theorem	xoranor 1377	One way of defining exclusive or. Equivalent to df-xor 1376. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon and Mario Carneiro, 1-Mar-2018.)
|- ( ( ph \/_ ps ) <-> ( ( ph \/ ps ) /\ ( -. ph \/ -. ps ) ) )
Theorem	excxor 1378	This tautology shows that xor is really exclusive. (Contributed by FL, 22-Nov-2010.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 5-May-2018.)
|- ( ( ph \/_ ps ) <-> ( ( ph /\ -. ps ) \/ ( -. ph /\ ps ) ) )
Theorem	xoror 1379	XOR implies OR. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Apr-2019.)
|- ( ( ph \/_ ps ) -> ( ph \/ ps ) )
Theorem	xorbi2d 1380	Deduction joining an equivalence and a left operand to form equivalence of exclusive-or. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( th \/_ ps ) <-> ( th \/_ ch ) ) )
Theorem	xorbi1d 1381	Deduction joining an equivalence and a right operand to form equivalence of exclusive-or. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps \/_ th ) <-> ( ch \/_ th ) ) )
Theorem	xorbi12d 1382	Deduction joining two equivalences to form equivalence of exclusive-or. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> ( th <-> ta ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( ( ps \/_ th ) <-> ( ch \/_ ta ) ) )
Theorem	xorbi12i 1383	Equality property for XOR. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.)
|- ( ph <-> ps )   &    |- ( ch <-> th )   =>    |- ( ( ph \/_ ch ) <-> ( ps \/_ th ) )
Theorem	xorbin 1384	A consequence of exclusive or. In classical logic the converse also holds. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 8-Mar-2018.)
|- ( ( ph \/_ ps ) -> ( ph <-> -. ps ) )
Theorem	pm5.18im 1385	One direction of pm5.18dc 883, which holds for all propositions, not just decidable propositions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 10-Mar-2018.)
|- ( ( ph <-> ps ) -> -. ( ph <-> -. ps ) )
Theorem	xornbi 1386	A consequence of exclusive or. For decidable propositions this is an equivalence, as seen at xornbidc 1391. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 10-Mar-2018.)
|- ( ( ph \/_ ps ) -> -. ( ph <-> ps ) )
Theorem	xor3dc 1387	Two ways to express "exclusive or" between decidable propositions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 12-Apr-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> ( -. ( ph <-> ps ) <-> ( ph <-> -. ps ) ) ) )
Theorem	xorcom 1388	\/_ is commutative. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 6-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ( ph \/_ ps ) <-> ( ps \/_ ph ) )
Theorem	pm5.15dc 1389	A decidable proposition is equivalent to a decidable proposition or its negation. Based on theorem *5.15 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Apr-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> ( ( ph <-> ps ) \/ ( ph <-> -. ps ) ) ) )
Theorem	xor2dc 1390	Two ways to express "exclusive or" between decidable propositions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 17-Apr-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> ( -. ( ph <-> ps ) <-> ( ( ph \/ ps ) /\ -. ( ph /\ ps ) ) ) ) )
Theorem	xornbidc 1391	Exclusive or is equivalent to negated biconditional for decidable propositions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Apr-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> ( ( ph \/_ ps ) <-> -. ( ph <-> ps ) ) ) )
Theorem	xordc 1392	Two ways to express "exclusive or" between decidable propositions. Theorem *5.22 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124, but for decidable propositions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-May-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> ( -. ( ph <-> ps ) <-> ( ( ph /\ -. ps ) \/ ( ps /\ -. ph ) ) ) ) )
Theorem	xordc1 1393	Exclusive or implies the left proposition is decidable. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 12-Mar-2018.)
|- ( ( ph \/_ ps ) -> DECID ph )
Theorem	nbbndc 1394	Move negation outside of biconditional, for decidable propositions. Compare Theorem *5.18 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Apr-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> ( ( -. ph <-> ps ) <-> -. ( ph <-> ps ) ) ) )
Theorem	biassdc 1395	Associative law for the biconditional, for decidable propositions. The classical version (without the decidability conditions) is an axiom of system DS in Vladimir Lifschitz, "On calculational proofs", Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 113:207-224, 2002, http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/ai-lab/pub-view.php?PubID=26805, and, interestingly, was not included in Principia Mathematica but was apparently first noted by Jan Lukasiewicz circa 1923. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 4-May-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> (DECID ch -> ( ( ( ph <-> ps ) <-> ch ) <-> ( ph <-> ( ps <-> ch ) ) ) ) ) )
Theorem	bilukdc 1396	Lukasiewicz's shortest axiom for equivalential calculus (but modified to require decidable propositions). Storrs McCall, ed., Polish Logic 1920-1939 (Oxford, 1967), p. 96. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-May-2018.)
|- ( ( (DECID ph /\ DECID ps ) /\ DECID ch ) -> ( ( ph <-> ps ) <-> ( ( ch <-> ps ) <-> ( ph <-> ch ) ) ) )
Theorem	dfbi3dc 1397	An alternate definition of the biconditional for decidable propositions. Theorem *5.23 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124, but with decidability conditions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-May-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> ( ( ph <-> ps ) <-> ( ( ph /\ ps ) \/ ( -. ph /\ -. ps ) ) ) ) )
Theorem	pm5.24dc 1398	Theorem *5.24 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124, but for decidable propositions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-May-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> ( -. ( ( ph /\ ps ) \/ ( -. ph /\ -. ps ) ) <-> ( ( ph /\ -. ps ) \/ ( ps /\ -. ph ) ) ) ) )
Theorem	xordidc 1399	Conjunction distributes over exclusive-or, for decidable propositions. This is one way to interpret the distributive law of multiplication over addition in modulo 2 arithmetic. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 14-Jul-2018.)
|- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> (DECID ch -> ( ( ph /\ ( ps \/_ ch ) ) <-> ( ( ph /\ ps ) \/_ ( ph /\ ch ) ) ) ) ) )
Theorem	anxordi 1400	Conjunction distributes over exclusive-or. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 7-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ( ps \/_ ch ) ) <-> ( ( ph /\ ps ) \/_ ( ph /\ ch ) ) )