P. 170 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 16901-16930   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	nconstwlpo 16901*	Existence of a certain non-constant function from reals to integers implies om e. WOmni (the Weak Limited Principle of Omniscience or WLPO). Based on Exercise 11.6(ii) of [HoTT], p. (varies). (Contributed by BJ and Jim Kingdon, 22-Jul-2024.)
|- ( ph -> F : RR --> ZZ )   &    |- ( ph -> ( F ` 0 ) = 0 )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ x e. RR+ ) -> ( F ` x ) =/= 0 )   =>    |- ( ph -> om e. WOmni )
Theorem	neapmkvlem 16902*	Lemma for neapmkv 16903. The result, with a few hypotheses broken out for convenience. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 25-Jun-2024.)
|- ( ph -> F : NN --> { 0 , 1 } )   &    |- A = sum_ i e. NN ( ( 1 / ( 2 ^ i ) ) x. ( F ` i ) )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ A =/= 1 ) -> A # 1 )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( -. A. x e. NN ( F ` x ) = 1 -> E. x e. NN ( F ` x ) = 0 ) )
Theorem	neapmkv 16903*	If negated equality for real numbers implies apartness, Markov's Principle follows. Exercise 11.10 of [HoTT], p. (varies). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 24-Jun-2024.)
|- ( A. x e. RR A. y e. RR ( x =/= y -> x # y ) -> om e. Markov )
Theorem	neap0mkv 16904*	The analytic Markov principle can be expressed either with two arbitrary real numbers, or one arbitrary number and zero. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Feb-2025.)
|- ( A. x e. RR A. y e. RR ( x =/= y -> x # y ) <-> A. x e. RR ( x =/= 0 -> x # 0 ) )
Theorem	ltlenmkv 16905*	If < can be expressed as holding exactly when <_ holds and the values are not equal, then the analytic Markov's Principle applies. (To get the regular Markov's Principle, combine with neapmkv 16903). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Feb-2025.)
|- ( A. x e. RR A. y e. RR ( x < y <-> ( x <_ y /\ y =/= x ) ) -> A. x e. RR A. y e. RR ( x =/= y -> x # y ) )
14.4.8  Supremum and infimum
Theorem	supfz 16906	The supremum of a finite sequence of integers. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 8-Aug-2013.) (Revised by Jim Kingdon, 15-Oct-2022.)
|- ( N e. ( ZZ>= ` M ) -> sup ( ( M ... N ) , ZZ , < ) = N )
Theorem	inffz 16907	The infimum of a finite sequence of integers. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 8-Aug-2013.) (Revised by Jim Kingdon, 15-Oct-2022.)
|- ( N e. ( ZZ>= ` M ) -> inf ( ( M ... N ) , ZZ , < ) = M )
14.4.9  Circle constant
Theorem	taupi 16908	Relationship between tau and pi. This can be seen as connecting the ratio of a circle's circumference to its radius and the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 19-Feb-2019.) (Revised by AV, 1-Oct-2020.)
|- tau = ( 2 x. pi )
14.4.10  Finite group sum over unordered finite set
Syntax	cgfsu 16909	Extend class notation to include finite group sum over unordered finite set.
class gfsumgf
Definition	df-gfsum 16910*	Define the finite group sum (iterated sum) over an unordered finite set. As currently defined, df-igsum 13493 is indexed by consecutive integers, but in the case of a commutative monoid, the order of the sum doesn't matter and we can define a sum indexed by any finite set without needing to specify an order. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Mar-2026.)
|- gfsumgf = ( w e. CMnd , f e. _V |-> ( iota x ( dom f e. Fin /\ E. g ( g : ( 1 ... (♯ ` dom f ) ) -1-1-onto-> dom f /\ x = ( w gsumg ( f o. g ) ) ) ) ) )
Theorem	gfsumval 16911	Value of the finite group sum over an unordered finite set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 24-Mar-2026.)
|- B = ( Base ` W )   &    |- ( ph -> W e. CMnd )   &    |- ( ph -> F : A --> B )   &    |- ( ph -> A e. Fin )   &    |- ( ph -> G : ( 1 ... (♯ ` A ) ) -1-1-onto-> A )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( W gfsumgf F ) = ( W gsumg ( F o. G ) ) )
Theorem	gsumgfsum1 16912	On an integer range starting at one, gsumg and gfsumgf agree. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 25-Mar-2026.)
|- B = ( Base ` G )   &    |- ( ph -> G e. CMnd )   &    |- ( ph -> N e. NN0 )   &    |- ( ph -> F : ( 1 ... N ) --> B )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( G gsumg F ) = ( G gfsumgf F ) )
Theorem	gfsum0 16913	An empty finite group sum is the identity. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 26-Mar-2026.)
|- ( G e. CMnd -> ( G gfsumgf (/) ) = ( 0g ` G ) )
Theorem	gsumgfsumlem 16914*	Shifting the indexes of a group sum indexed by consecutive integers. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 26-Mar-2026.)
|- B = ( Base ` G )   &    |- ( ph -> G e. CMnd )   &    |- ( ph -> N e. ( ZZ>= ` M ) )   &    |- ( ph -> F : ( M ... N ) --> B )   &    |- S = ( j e. ( 1 ... ( N + ( 1 - M ) ) ) |-> ( j - ( 1 - M ) ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( G gsumg F ) = ( G gsumg ( F o. S ) ) )
Theorem	gsumgfsum 16915	On an integer range, gsumg and gfsumgf agree. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 25-Mar-2026.)
|- B = ( Base ` G )   &    |- ( ph -> G e. CMnd )   &    |- ( ph -> M e. ZZ )   &    |- ( ph -> N e. ZZ )   &    |- ( ph -> F : ( M ... N ) --> B )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( G gsumg F ) = ( G gfsumgf F ) )
Theorem	gfsumsn 16916*	Group sum of a singleton. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Apr-2026.)
|- B = ( Base ` G )   &    |- ( k = M -> A = C )   =>    |- ( ( G e. CMnd /\ M e. V /\ C e. B ) -> ( G gfsumgf ( k e. { M } |-> A ) ) = C )
Theorem	gfsump1 16917	Splitting off one element from a finite group sum. This would typically used in a proof by induction. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Apr-2026.)
|- B = ( Base ` G )   &    |- .+ = ( +g ` G )   &    |- ( ph -> G e. CMnd )   &    |- ( ph -> F : ( Y u. { Z } ) --> B )   &    |- ( ph -> Y e. Fin )   &    |- ( ph -> Z e. V )   &    |- ( ph -> -. Z e. Y )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( G gfsumgf F ) = ( ( G gfsumgf ( F |` Y ) ) .+ ( F ` Z ) ) )
Theorem	gfsumz 16918*	Value of a finite group sum over the zero element. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 24-May-2026.)
|- .0. = ( 0g ` G )   =>    |- ( ( G e. CMnd /\ A e. Fin ) -> ( G gfsumgf ( k e. A |-> .0. ) ) = .0. )
Theorem	gfsumcl 16919	Closure of a finite group sum. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 8-Apr-2026.)
|- B = ( Base ` G )   &    |- .0. = ( 0g ` G )   &    |- ( ph -> G e. CMnd )   &    |- ( ph -> A e. Fin )   &    |- ( ph -> F : A --> B )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( G gfsumgf F ) e. B )
14.5  Mathbox for Mykola Mostovenko
Theorem	ax1hfs 16920	Heyting's formal system Axiom #1 from [Heyting] p. 127. (Contributed by MM, 11-Aug-2018.)
|- ( ph -> ( ph /\ ph ) )
14.6  Mathbox for David A. Wheeler
14.6.1  Testable propositions
Theorem	dftest 16921	A proposition is testable iff its negative or double-negative is true. See Chapter 2 [Moschovakis] p. 2. We do not formally define testability with a new token, but instead use DECID -. before the formula in question. For example, DECID -. x = y corresponds to " x = y is testable". (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 13-Aug-2018.) For statements about testable propositions, search for the keyword "testable" in the comments of statements, for instance using the Metamath command "MM> SEARCH * "testable" / COMMENTS". (New usage is discouraged.)
|- (DECID -. ph <-> ( -. ph \/ -. -. ph ) )
14.6.2  Allsome quantifier These are definitions and proofs involving an experimental "allsome" quantifier (aka "all some"). In informal language, statements like "All Martians are green" imply that there is at least one Martian. But it's easy to mistranslate informal language into formal notations because similar statements like A. x ph -> ps do not imply that ph is ever true, leading to vacuous truths. Some systems include a mechanism to counter this, e.g., PVS allows types to be appended with "+" to declare that they are nonempty. This section presents a different solution to the same problem. The "allsome" quantifier expressly includes the notion of both "all" and "there exists at least one" (aka some), and is defined to make it easier to more directly express both notions. The hope is that if a quantifier more directly expresses this concept, it will be used instead and reduce the risk of creating formal expressions that look okay but in fact are mistranslations. The term "allsome" was chosen because it's short, easy to say, and clearly hints at the two concepts it combines. I do not expect this to be used much in metamath, because in metamath there's a general policy of avoiding the use of new definitions unless there are very strong reasons to do so. Instead, my goal is to rigorously define this quantifier and demonstrate a few basic properties of it. The syntax allows two forms that look like they would be problematic, but they are fine. When applied to a top-level implication we allow A.! x ( ph -> ps ), and when restricted (applied to a class) we allow A.! x e. A ph. The first symbol after the setvar variable must always be e. if it is the form applied to a class, and since e. cannot begin a wff, it is unambiguous. The -> looks like it would be a problem because ph or ps might include implications, but any implication arrow -> within any wff must be surrounded by parentheses, so only the implication arrow of A.! can follow the wff. The implication syntax would work fine without the parentheses, but I added the parentheses because it makes things clearer inside larger complex expressions, and it's also more consistent with the rest of the syntax. For more, see "The Allsome Quantifier" by David A. Wheeler at https://dwheeler.com/essays/allsome.html I hope that others will eventually agree that allsome is awesome.
Syntax	walsi 16922	Extend wff definition to include "all some" applied to a top-level implication, which means ps is true whenever ph is true, and there is at least least one x where ph is true. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 20-Oct-2018.)
wff A.! x ( ph -> ps )
Syntax	walsc 16923	Extend wff definition to include "all some" applied to a class, which means ph is true for all x in A, and there is at least one x in A. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 20-Oct-2018.)
wff A.! x e. A ph
Definition	df-alsi 16924	Define "all some" applied to a top-level implication, which means ps is true whenever ph is true and there is at least one x where ph is true. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 20-Oct-2018.)
|- ( A.! x ( ph -> ps ) <-> ( A. x ( ph -> ps ) /\ E. x ph ) )
Definition	df-alsc 16925	Define "all some" applied to a class, which means ph is true for all x in A and there is at least one x in A. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 20-Oct-2018.)
|- ( A.! x e. A ph <-> ( A. x e. A ph /\ E. x x e. A ) )
Theorem	alsconv 16926	There is an equivalence between the two "all some" forms. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 22-Oct-2018.)
|- ( A.! x ( x e. A -> ph ) <-> A.! x e. A ph )
Theorem	alsi1d 16927	Deduction rule: Given "all some" applied to a top-level inference, you can extract the "for all" part. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 20-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ph -> A.! x ( ps -> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> A. x ( ps -> ch ) )
Theorem	alsi2d 16928	Deduction rule: Given "all some" applied to a top-level inference, you can extract the "exists" part. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 20-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ph -> A.! x ( ps -> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> E. x ps )
Theorem	alsc1d 16929	Deduction rule: Given "all some" applied to a class, you can extract the "for all" part. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 20-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ph -> A.! x e. A ps )   =>    |- ( ph -> A. x e. A ps )
Theorem	alsc2d 16930	Deduction rule: Given "all some" applied to a class, you can extract the "there exists" part. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 20-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ph -> A.! x e. A ps )   =>    |- ( ph -> E. x x e. A )

< Previous  Wrap >