| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 167 of 171) | < Previous Next > | |
| Browser slow? Try the
Unicode version. |
||
|
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > ILE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
||
| Type | Label | Description | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthv 16601 | The classes involved in a Eulerian path are sets. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 13-Mar-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | iseupth 16602 |
The property " | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | iseupthf1o 16603 |
The property " | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthi 16604 | Properties of an Eulerian path. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 12-Mar-2015.) (Revised by AV, 18-Feb-2021.) (Proof shortened by AV, 30-Oct-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthf1o 16605 |
The | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthfi 16606 | Any graph with an Eulerian path is of finite size, i.e. with a finite number of edges. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 18-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthseg 16607 |
The | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthcl 16608 |
An Eulerian path has length ♯ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthistrl 16609 | An Eulerian path is a trail. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 24-Nov-2017.) (Revised by AV, 18-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthiswlk 16610 | An Eulerian path is a walk. (Contributed by AV, 6-Apr-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthpf 16611 |
The | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthres 16612 |
The restriction | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem1 16613 | Lemma for eupth2 . (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Apr-2015.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem2dc 16614 | Lemma for eupth2 . (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Apr-2015.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | trlsegvdeglem1 16615 | Lemma for trlsegvdeg . (Contributed by AV, 20-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | trlsegvdeglem2 16616 | Lemma for trlsegvdeg . (Contributed by AV, 20-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | trlsegvdeglem3 16617 | Lemma for trlsegvdeg . (Contributed by AV, 20-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | trlsegvdeglem4 16618 | Lemma for trlsegvdeg . (Contributed by AV, 21-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | trlsegvdeglem5 16619 | Lemma for trlsegvdeg . (Contributed by AV, 21-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | trlsegvdeglem6 16620 | Lemma for trlsegvdeg . (Contributed by AV, 21-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | trlsegvdeglem7 16621 | Lemma for trlsegvdeg . (Contributed by AV, 21-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | trlsegvdegfi 16622 |
The effect on vertex degree of adding one edge to a trail. In the
following, a subgraph induced by a segment of a trail is called a
"subtrail": For any subtrail | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem3lem1fi 16623 | Lemma for eupth2lem3fi 16631. (Contributed by AV, 21-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem3lem2fi 16624 | Lemma for eupth2lem3fi 16631. (Contributed by AV, 21-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem3lem3fi 16625* |
Lemma for eupth2lem3fi 16631. If a loop
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem3lem6fi 16626* |
If an edge (not a loop) is added to a trail, the degree of vertices
not being end vertices of this edge remains odd if it was odd before
(regarding the subgraphs induced by the involved trails). Remark:
This seems to be not valid for hyperedges joining more vertices than
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem3lem5 16627 | Lemma for eupth2fi 16634. (Contributed by AV, 25-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem3lem4fi 16628* | Lemma for eupth2lem3fi 16631. If an edge (not a loop) is added to a trail, the degree of the end vertices of this edge remains odd if it was odd before (regarding the subgraphs induced by the involved trails). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 25-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem3lem7fi 16629* | Lemma for eupth2lem3fi 16631: Combining trlsegvdegfi 16622, eupth2lem3lem3fi 16625, eupth2lem3lem4fi 16628 and eupth2lem3lem6fi 16626. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 27-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupthvdres 16630 | The vertex degree remains the same for all vertices if the edges are restricted to the edges of an Eulerian path. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 26-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lem3fi 16631* | Lemma for eupth2fi 16634. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 26-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lembfi 16632* | Lemma for eupth2fi 16634 (induction basis): There are no vertices of odd degree in an Eulerian path of length 0, having no edge and identical endpoints (the single vertex of the Eulerian path). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 26-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2lemsfi 16633* | Lemma for eupth2fi 16634 (induction step): The only vertices of odd degree in a graph with an Eulerian path are the endpoints, and then only if the endpoints are distinct, if the Eulerian path shortened by one edge has this property. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 26-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eupth2fi 16634* | The only vertices of odd degree in a graph with an Eulerian path are the endpoints, and then only if the endpoints are distinct. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 26-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eulerpathprum 16635* | A graph with an Eulerian path has either zero or two vertices of odd degree. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 26-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | eulerpathum 16636* | A multigraph with an Eulerian path has either zero or two vertices of odd degree. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Apr-2015.) (Revised by AV, 26-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
According to Wikipedia ("Seven Bridges of Königsberg",
9-Mar-2021,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Bridges_of_Koenigsberg):
"The Seven
Bridges of Königsberg is a historically notable problem in mathematics.
Its negative resolution by Leonhard Euler in 1736 laid the foundations of
graph theory and prefigured the idea of topology. The city of
Königsberg in [East] Prussia (now Kaliningrad, Russia) was set on both
sides of the Pregel River, and included two large islands - Kneiphof and
Lomse - which were connected to each other, or to the two mainland portions
of the city, by seven bridges. The problem was to devise a walk through the
city that would cross each of those bridges once and only once.". Euler
proved that the problem has no solution by applying Euler's theorem to the
Königsberg graph, which is obtained by replacing each land mass with an
abstract "vertex" or node, and each bridge with an abstract
connection, an
"edge", which connects two land masses/vertices. The
Königsberg graph
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsbergvtx 16637 |
The set of vertices of the Königsberg graph | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsbergiedg 16638 |
The indexed edges of the Königsberg graph | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsbergiedgwen 16639* |
The indexed edges of the Königsberg graph | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsbergssiedgwpren 16640* |
Each subset of the indexed edges of the Königsberg graph | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsbergssiedgwen 16641* |
Each subset of the indexed edges of the Königsberg graph | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsbergumgr 16642 |
The Königsberg graph | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsberglem1 16643 |
Lemma 1 for konigsberg 16648: Vertex | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsberglem2 16644 |
Lemma 2 for konigsberg 16648: Vertex | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsberglem3 16645 |
Lemma 3 for konigsberg 16648: Vertex | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsberglem4 16646* |
Lemma 4 for konigsberg 16648: Vertices | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsberglem5 16647* | Lemma 5 for konigsberg 16648: The set of vertices of odd degree is greater than 2. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Mar-2015.) (Revised by AV, 28-Feb-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | konigsberg 16648 |
The Königsberg Bridge problem. If | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This section describes the conventions we use. These conventions often refer to existing mathematical practices, which are discussed in more detail in other references. The following sources lay out how mathematics is developed without the law of the excluded middle. Of course, there are a greater number of sources which assume excluded middle and most of what is in them applies here too (especially in a treatment such as ours which is built on first-order logic and set theory, rather than, say, type theory). Studying how a topic is treated in the Metamath Proof Explorer and the references therein is often a good place to start (and is easy to compare with the Intuitionistic Logic Explorer). The textbooks provide a motivation for what we are doing, whereas Metamath lets you see in detail all hidden and implicit steps. Most standard theorems are accompanied by citations. Some closely followed texts include the following:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | conventions 16649 |
Unless there is a reason to diverge, we follow the conventions of the
Metamath Proof Explorer (MPE, set.mm). This list of conventions is
intended to be read in conjunction with the corresponding conventions in
the Metamath Proof Explorer, and only the differences are described
below.
Label naming conventions Here are a few of the label naming conventions:
The following table shows some commonly-used abbreviations in labels which are not found in the Metamath Proof Explorer, in alphabetical order. For each abbreviation we provide a mnenomic to help you remember it, the source theorem/assumption defining it, an expression showing what it looks like, whether or not it is a "syntax fragment" (an abbreviation that indicates a particular kind of syntax), and hyperlinks to label examples that use the abbreviation. The abbreviation is bolded if there is a df-NAME definition but the label fragment is not NAME. For the "g" abbreviation, this is related to the set.mm usage, in which "is a set" conditions are converted from hypotheses to antecedents, but is also used where "is a set" conditions are added relative to similar set.mm theorems.
(Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 24-Feb-2020.) (New usage is discouraged.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | ex-or 16650 | Example for ax-io 721. Example by David A. Wheeler. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-May-2015.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | ex-an 16651 | Example for ax-ia1 106. Example by David A. Wheeler. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-May-2015.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | 1kp2ke3k 16652 |
Example for df-dec 9757, 1000 + 2000 = 3000.
This proof disproves (by counterexample) the assertion of Hao Wang, who stated, "There is a theorem in the primitive notation of set theory that corresponds to the arithmetic theorem 1000 + 2000 = 3000. The formula would be forbiddingly long... even if (one) knows the definitions and is asked to simplify the long formula according to them, chances are he will make errors and arrive at some incorrect result." (Hao Wang, "Theory and practice in mathematics" , In Thomas Tymoczko, editor, New Directions in the Philosophy of Mathematics, pp 129-152, Birkauser Boston, Inc., Boston, 1986. (QA8.6.N48). The quote itself is on page 140.) This is noted in Metamath: A Computer Language for Pure Mathematics by Norman Megill (2007) section 1.1.3. Megill then states, "A number of writers have conveyed the impression that the kind of absolute rigor provided by Metamath is an impossible dream, suggesting that a complete, formal verification of a typical theorem would take millions of steps in untold volumes of books... These writers assume, however, that in order to achieve the kind of complete formal verification they desire one must break down a proof into individual primitive steps that make direct reference to the axioms. This is not necessary. There is no reason not to make use of previously proved theorems rather than proving them over and over... A hierarchy of theorems and definitions permits an exponential growth in the formula sizes and primitive proof steps to be described with only a linear growth in the number of symbols used. Of course, this is how ordinary informal mathematics is normally done anyway, but with Metamath it can be done with absolute rigor and precision."
The proof here starts with This proof heavily relies on the decimal constructor df-dec 9757 developed by Mario Carneiro in 2015. The underlying Metamath language has an intentionally very small set of primitives; it doesn't even have a built-in construct for numbers. Instead, the digits are defined using these primitives, and the decimal constructor is used to make it easy to express larger numbers as combinations of digits. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 29-Jun-2016.) (Shortened by Mario Carneiro using the arithmetic algorithm in mmj2, 30-Jun-2016.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | ex-fl 16653 | Example for df-fl 10683. Example by David A. Wheeler. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 18-Jun-2015.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | ex-ceil 16654 | Example for df-ceil 10684. (Contributed by AV, 4-Sep-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | ex-exp 16655 | Example for df-exp 10954. (Contributed by AV, 4-Sep-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | ex-fac 16656 | Example for df-fac 11142. (Contributed by AV, 4-Sep-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | ex-bc 16657 | Example for df-bc 11164. (Contributed by AV, 4-Sep-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | ex-dvds 16658 | Example for df-dvds 12533: 3 divides into 6. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 19-May-2015.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | ex-gcd 16659 | Example for df-gcd 12709. (Contributed by AV, 5-Sep-2021.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | mathbox 16660 |
(This theorem is a dummy placeholder for these guidelines. The label
of this theorem, "mathbox", is hard-coded into the Metamath
program to
identify the start of the mathbox section for web page generation.)
A "mathbox" is a user-contributed section that is maintained by its contributor independently from the main part of iset.mm. For contributors: By making a contribution, you agree to release it into the public domain, according to the statement at the beginning of iset.mm. Guidelines: Mathboxes in iset.mm follow the same practices as in set.mm, so refer to the mathbox guidelines there for more details. (Contributed by NM, 20-Feb-2007.) (Revised by the Metamath team, 9-Sep-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | depindlem1 16661* | Lemma for depind 16664. (Contributed by Matthew House, 14-Apr-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | depindlem2 16662* | Lemma for depind 16664. (Contributed by Matthew House, 14-Apr-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | depindlem3 16663* | Lemma for depind 16664. (Contributed by Matthew House, 14-Apr-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | depind 16664* | Theorem related to a dependently typed induction principle in type theory. (Contributed by Matthew House, 14-Apr-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | lealltlt1 16665* |
Alternative definition for | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | lealltlt2 16666* |
Alternative definition for | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | dichmul0orlem1 16667 | Lemma for dichmul0or 16674. (Contributed by Matthew House, 29-Jun-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | dichmul0orlem2 16668 | Lemma for dichmul0or 16674. (Contributed by Matthew House, 29-Jun-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | dichmul0orlem3 16669* | Lemma for dichmul0or 16674. (Contributed by Matthew House, 29-Jun-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | dichmul0orlem4 16670 | Lemma for dichmul0or 16674. (Contributed by Matthew House, 29-Jun-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | dichmul0orlem5 16671 | Lemma for dichmul0or 16674. (Contributed by Matthew House, 29-Jun-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | dichmul0orlem6 16672 | Lemma for dichmul0or 16674. (Contributed by Matthew House, 28-Jun-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | dichmul0orlem7 16673* | Lemma for dichmul0or 16674. (Contributed by Matthew House, 28-Jun-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | dichmul0or 16674* | Real number dichotomy is equivalent to the zero product principle for complex numbers: if a product is zero, one of its factors must be zero. (Contributed by Matthew House, 29-Jun-2026.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-nnsn 16675 | As far as implying a negated formula is concerned, a formula is equivalent to its double negation. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-nnor 16676 | Double negation of a disjunction in terms of implication. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Oct-2019.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-nnim 16677 | The double negation of an implication implies the implication with the consequent doubly negated. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-nnan 16678 | The double negation of a conjunction implies the conjunction of the double negations. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-nnclavius 16679 | Clavius law with doubly negated consequent. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Dec-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-imnimnn 16680 | If a formula is implied by both a formula and its negation, then it is not refutable. There is another proof using the inference associated with bj-nnclavius 16679 as its last step. (Contributed by BJ, 27-Oct-2024.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Some of the following theorems, like bj-sttru 16682 or bj-stfal 16684 could be deduced from their analogues for decidability, but stability is not provable from decidability in minimal calculus, so direct proofs have their interest. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-trst 16681 | A provable formula is stable. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-sttru 16682 | The true truth value is stable. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Aug-2024.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-fast 16683 | A refutable formula is stable. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-stfal 16684 | The false truth value is stable. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Aug-2024.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-nnst 16685 |
Double negation of stability of a formula. Intuitionistic logic refutes
unstability (but does not prove stability) of any formula. This theorem
can also be proved in classical refutability calculus (see
https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/bj-peircestab.html) but not in minimal
calculus (see https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/bj-stabpeirce.html). See
nnnotnotr 16930 for the version not using the definition of
stability.
(Contributed by BJ, 9-Oct-2019.) Prove it in | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-nnbist 16686 |
If a formula is not refutable, then it is stable if and only if it is
provable. By double-negation translation, if | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-stst 16687 | Stability of a proposition is stable if and only if that proposition is stable. STAB is idempotent. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Oct-2019.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-stim 16688 | A conjunction with a stable consequent is stable. See stabnot 845 for negation , bj-stan 16689 for conjunction , and bj-stal 16691 for universal quantification. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-stan 16689 | The conjunction of two stable formulas is stable. See bj-stim 16688 for implication, stabnot 845 for negation, and bj-stal 16691 for universal quantification. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-stand 16690 | The conjunction of two stable formulas is stable. Deduction form of bj-stan 16689. Its proof is shorter (when counting all steps, including syntactic steps), so one could prove it first and then bj-stan 16689 from it, the usual way. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-stal 16691 | The universal quantification of a stable formula is stable. See bj-stim 16688 for implication, stabnot 845 for negation, and bj-stan 16689 for conjunction. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-pm2.18st 16692 | Clavius law for stable formulas. See pm2.18dc 867. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Dec-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-con1st 16693 | Contraposition when the antecedent is a negated stable proposition. See con1dc 868. (Contributed by BJ, 11-Nov-2024.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-trdc 16694 | A provable formula is decidable. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-dctru 16695 | The true truth value is decidable. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Aug-2024.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-fadc 16696 | A refutable formula is decidable. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-dcfal 16697 | The false truth value is decidable. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Aug-2024.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-dcstab 16698 | A decidable formula is stable. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-nnbidc 16699 | If a formula is not refutable, then it is decidable if and only if it is provable. See also comment of bj-nnbist 16686. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2023.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Theorem | bj-nndcALT 16700 | Alternate proof of nndc 863. (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Contributed by BJ, 9-Oct-2019.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |