P. 30 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 2901-3000   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	eqvincg 2901*	A variable introduction law for class equality, deduction version. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 2-Mar-2017.)
|- ( A e. V -> ( A = B <-> E. x ( x = A /\ x = B ) ) )
Theorem	eqvincf 2902	A variable introduction law for class equality, using bound-variable hypotheses instead of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by NM, 14-Sep-2003.)
|- F/_ x A   &    |- F/_ x B   &    |- A e. _V   =>    |- ( A = B <-> E. x ( x = A /\ x = B ) )
Theorem	alexeq 2903*	Two ways to express substitution of A for x in ph. (Contributed by NM, 2-Mar-1995.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( A. x ( x = A -> ph ) <-> E. x ( x = A /\ ph ) )
Theorem	ceqex 2904*	Equality implies equivalence with substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Mar-1995.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> E. x ( x = A /\ ph ) ) )
Theorem	ceqsexg 2905*	A representation of explicit substitution of a class for a variable, inferred from an implicit substitution hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2004.)
|- F/ x ps   &    |- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. V -> ( E. x ( x = A /\ ph ) <-> ps ) )
Theorem	ceqsexgv 2906*	Elimination of an existential quantifier, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1996.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. V -> ( E. x ( x = A /\ ph ) <-> ps ) )
Theorem	ceqsrexv 2907*	Elimination of a restricted existential quantifier, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 30-Apr-2004.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. B -> ( E. x e. B ( x = A /\ ph ) <-> ps ) )
Theorem	ceqsrexbv 2908*	Elimination of a restricted existential quantifier, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Mar-2014.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E. x e. B ( x = A /\ ph ) <-> ( A e. B /\ ps ) )
Theorem	ceqsrex2v 2909*	Elimination of a restricted existential quantifier, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 29-Oct-2005.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- ( y = B -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ( A e. C /\ B e. D ) -> ( E. x e. C E. y e. D ( ( x = A /\ y = B ) /\ ph ) <-> ch ) )
Theorem	clel2 2910*	An alternate definition of class membership when the class is a set. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( A e. B <-> A. x ( x = A -> x e. B ) )
Theorem	clel3g 2911*	An alternate definition of class membership when the class is a set. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-2005.)
|- ( B e. V -> ( A e. B <-> E. x ( x = B /\ A e. x ) ) )
Theorem	clel3 2912*	An alternate definition of class membership when the class is a set. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.)
|- B e. _V   =>    |- ( A e. B <-> E. x ( x = B /\ A e. x ) )
Theorem	clel4 2913*	An alternate definition of class membership when the class is a set. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.)
|- B e. _V   =>    |- ( A e. B <-> A. x ( x = B -> A e. x ) )
Theorem	clel5 2914*	Alternate definition of class membership: a class X is an element of another class A iff there is an element of A equal to X. (Contributed by AV, 13-Nov-2020.) (Revised by Steven Nguyen, 19-May-2023.)
|- ( X e. A <-> E. x e. A X = x )
Theorem	pm13.183 2915*	Compare theorem *13.183 in [WhiteheadRussell] p. 178. Only A is required to be a set. (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 3-Jun-2011.)
|- ( A e. V -> ( A = B <-> A. z ( z = A <-> z = B ) ) )
Theorem	rr19.3v 2916*	Restricted quantifier version of Theorem 19.3 of [Margaris] p. 89. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2012.)
|- ( A. x e. A A. y e. A ph <-> A. x e. A ph )
Theorem	rr19.28v 2917*	Restricted quantifier version of Theorem 19.28 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 29-Oct-2012.)
|- ( A. x e. A A. y e. A ( ph /\ ps ) <-> A. x e. A ( ph /\ A. y e. A ps ) )
Theorem	elabgt 2918*	Membership in a class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Closed theorem version of elabg 2923.) (Contributed by NM, 7-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.)
|- ( ( A e. B /\ A. x ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) ) ) -> ( A e. { x | ph } <-> ps ) )
Theorem	elabgf 2919	Membership in a class abstraction, using implicit substitution. Compare Theorem 6.13 of [Quine] p. 44. This version has bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable restrictions. (Contributed by NM, 21-Sep-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.)
|- F/_ x A   &    |- F/ x ps   &    |- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. B -> ( A e. { x | ph } <-> ps ) )
Theorem	elabf 2920*	Membership in a class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.)
|- F/ x ps   &    |- A e. _V   &    |- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. { x | ph } <-> ps )
Theorem	elab 2921*	Membership in a class abstraction, using implicit substitution. Compare Theorem 6.13 of [Quine] p. 44. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. { x | ph } <-> ps )
Theorem	elabd 2922*	Explicit demonstration the class { x | ps } is not empty by the example X. (Contributed by RP, 12-Aug-2020.)
|- ( ph -> X e. _V )   &    |- ( ph -> ch )   &    |- ( x = X -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> E. x ps )
Theorem	elabg 2923*	Membership in a class abstraction, using implicit substitution. Compare Theorem 6.13 of [Quine] p. 44. (Contributed by NM, 14-Apr-1995.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. V -> ( A e. { x | ph } <-> ps ) )
Theorem	elab2g 2924*	Membership in a class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 13-Sep-1995.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- B = { x | ph }   =>    |- ( A e. V -> ( A e. B <-> ps ) )
Theorem	elab2 2925*	Membership in a class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 13-Sep-1995.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- B = { x | ph }   =>    |- ( A e. B <-> ps )
Theorem	elab4g 2926*	Membership in a class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 17-Oct-2012.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- B = { x | ph }   =>    |- ( A e. B <-> ( A e. _V /\ ps ) )
Theorem	elab3gf 2927	Membership in a class abstraction, with a weaker antecedent than elabgf 2919. (Contributed by NM, 6-Sep-2011.)
|- F/_ x A   &    |- F/ x ps   &    |- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( ( ps -> A e. B ) -> ( A e. { x | ph } <-> ps ) )
Theorem	elab3g 2928*	Membership in a class abstraction, with a weaker antecedent than elabg 2923. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-2006.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( ( ps -> A e. B ) -> ( A e. { x | ph } <-> ps ) )
Theorem	elab3 2929*	Membership in a class abstraction using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 10-Nov-2000.)
|- ( ps -> A e. _V )   &    |- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. { x | ph } <-> ps )
Theorem	elrabi 2930*	Implication for the membership in a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 31-Dec-2017.)
|- ( A e. { x e. V | ph } -> A e. V )
Theorem	elrabf 2931	Membership in a restricted class abstraction, using implicit substitution. This version has bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable restrictions. (Contributed by NM, 21-Sep-2003.)
|- F/_ x A   &    |- F/_ x B   &    |- F/ x ps   &    |- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. { x e. B | ph } <-> ( A e. B /\ ps ) )
Theorem	elrab3t 2932*	Membership in a restricted class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Closed theorem version of elrab3 2934.) (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 31-Aug-2017.)
|- ( ( A. x ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) ) /\ A e. B ) -> ( A e. { x e. B | ph } <-> ps ) )
Theorem	elrab 2933*	Membership in a restricted class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1999.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. { x e. B | ph } <-> ( A e. B /\ ps ) )
Theorem	elrab3 2934*	Membership in a restricted class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Oct-2006.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A e. B -> ( A e. { x e. B | ph } <-> ps ) )
Theorem	elrabd 2935*	Membership in a restricted class abstraction, using implicit substitution. Deduction version of elrab 2933. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 23-Oct-2021.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   &    |- ( ph -> A e. B )   &    |- ( ph -> ch )   =>    |- ( ph -> A e. { x e. B | ps } )
Theorem	elrab2 2936*	Membership in a class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Nov-2006.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- C = { x e. B | ph }   =>    |- ( A e. C <-> ( A e. B /\ ps ) )
Theorem	ralab 2937*	Universal quantification over a class abstraction. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 10-Jun-2010.)
|- ( y = x -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A. x e. { y | ph } ch <-> A. x ( ps -> ch ) )
Theorem	ralrab 2938*	Universal quantification over a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 10-Jun-2010.)
|- ( y = x -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( A. x e. { y e. A | ph } ch <-> A. x e. A ( ps -> ch ) )
Theorem	rexab 2939*	Existential quantification over a class abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 23-Jan-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Sep-2015.)
|- ( y = x -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E. x e. { y | ph } ch <-> E. x ( ps /\ ch ) )
Theorem	rexrab 2940*	Existential quantification over a class abstraction. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 17-Jun-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Sep-2015.)
|- ( y = x -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E. x e. { y e. A | ph } ch <-> E. x e. A ( ps /\ ch ) )
Theorem	ralab2 2941*	Universal quantification over a class abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 3-Sep-2015.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( A. x e. { y | ph } ps <-> A. y ( ph -> ch ) )
Theorem	ralrab2 2942*	Universal quantification over a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 3-Sep-2015.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( A. x e. { y e. A | ph } ps <-> A. y e. A ( ph -> ch ) )
Theorem	rexab2 2943*	Existential quantification over a class abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 3-Sep-2015.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( E. x e. { y | ph } ps <-> E. y ( ph /\ ch ) )
Theorem	rexrab2 2944*	Existential quantification over a class abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 3-Sep-2015.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( E. x e. { y e. A | ph } ps <-> E. y e. A ( ph /\ ch ) )
Theorem	abidnf 2945*	Identity used to create closed-form versions of bound-variable hypothesis builders for class expressions. (Contributed by NM, 10-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.)
|- ( F/_ x A -> { z | A. x z e. A } = A )
Theorem	dedhb 2946*	A deduction theorem for converting the inference |- F/_ x A => |- ph into a closed theorem. Use nfa1 1565 and nfab 2354 to eliminate the hypothesis of the substitution instance ps of the inference. For converting the inference form into a deduction form, abidnf 2945 is useful. (Contributed by NM, 8-Dec-2006.)
|- ( A = { z | A. x z e. A } -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- ps   =>    |- ( F/_ x A -> ph )
Theorem	eqeu 2947*	A condition which implies existential uniqueness. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 8-Sep-2009.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( ( A e. B /\ ps /\ A. x ( ph -> x = A ) ) -> E! x ph )
Theorem	eueq 2948*	Equality has existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-1994.)
|- ( A e. _V <-> E! x x = A )
Theorem	eueq1 2949*	Equality has existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1995.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- E! x x = A
Theorem	eueq2dc 2950*	Equality has existential uniqueness (split into 2 cases). (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1995.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- B e. _V   =>    |- (DECID ph -> E! x ( ( ph /\ x = A ) \/ ( -. ph /\ x = B ) ) )
Theorem	eueq3dc 2951*	Equality has existential uniqueness (split into 3 cases). (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1995.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 28-Sep-2015.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- B e. _V   &    |- C e. _V   &    |- -. ( ph /\ ps )   =>    |- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> E! x ( ( ph /\ x = A ) \/ ( -. ( ph \/ ps ) /\ x = B ) \/ ( ps /\ x = C ) ) ) )
Theorem	moeq 2952*	There is at most one set equal to a class. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.)
|- E* x x = A
Theorem	moeq3dc 2953*	"At most one" property of equality (split into 3 cases). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Jul-2018.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- B e. _V   &    |- C e. _V   &    |- -. ( ph /\ ps )   =>    |- (DECID ph -> (DECID ps -> E* x ( ( ph /\ x = A ) \/ ( -. ( ph \/ ps ) /\ x = B ) \/ ( ps /\ x = C ) ) ) )
Theorem	mosubt 2954*	"At most one" remains true after substitution. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Jan-2019.)
|- ( A. y E* x ph -> E* x E. y ( y = A /\ ph ) )
Theorem	mosub 2955*	"At most one" remains true after substitution. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.)
|- E* x ph   =>    |- E* x E. y ( y = A /\ ph )
Theorem	mo2icl 2956*	Theorem for inferring "at most one". (Contributed by NM, 17-Oct-1996.)
|- ( A. x ( ph -> x = A ) -> E* x ph )
Theorem	mob2 2957*	Consequence of "at most one". (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2015.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( ( A e. B /\ E* x ph /\ ph ) -> ( x = A <-> ps ) )
Theorem	moi2 2958*	Consequence of "at most one". (Contributed by NM, 29-Jun-2008.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( ( ( A e. B /\ E* x ph ) /\ ( ph /\ ps ) ) -> x = A )
Theorem	mob 2959*	Equality implied by "at most one". (Contributed by NM, 18-Feb-2006.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- ( x = B -> ( ph <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ( ( A e. C /\ B e. D ) /\ E* x ph /\ ps ) -> ( A = B <-> ch ) )
Theorem	moi 2960*	Equality implied by "at most one". (Contributed by NM, 18-Feb-2006.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- ( x = B -> ( ph <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ( ( A e. C /\ B e. D ) /\ E* x ph /\ ( ps /\ ch ) ) -> A = B )
Theorem	morex 2961*	Derive membership from uniqueness. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 2-Sep-2009.)
|- B e. _V   &    |- ( x = B -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( ( E. x e. A ph /\ E* x ph ) -> ( ps -> B e. A ) )
Theorem	euxfr2dc 2962*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable x to another variable y contained in expression A. (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2004.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- E* y x = A   =>    |- (DECID E. y E. x ( x = A /\ ph ) -> ( E! x E. y ( x = A /\ ph ) <-> E! y ph ) )
Theorem	euxfrdc 2963*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable x to another variable y contained in expression A. (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2004.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- E! y x = A   &    |- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- (DECID E. y E. x ( x = A /\ ps ) -> ( E! x ph <-> E! y ps ) )
Theorem	euind 2964*	Existential uniqueness via an indirect equality. (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2010.)
|- B e. _V   &    |- ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- ( x = y -> A = B )   =>    |- ( ( A. x A. y ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> A = B ) /\ E. x ph ) -> E! z A. x ( ph -> z = A ) )
Theorem	reu2 2965*	A way to express restricted uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 22-Nov-1994.)
|- ( E! x e. A ph <-> ( E. x e. A ph /\ A. x e. A A. y e. A ( ( ph /\ [ y / x ] ph ) -> x = y ) ) )
Theorem	reu6 2966*	A way to express restricted uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 20-Oct-2006.)
|- ( E! x e. A ph <-> E. y e. A A. x e. A ( ph <-> x = y ) )
Theorem	reu3 2967*	A way to express restricted uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.)
|- ( E! x e. A ph <-> ( E. x e. A ph /\ E. y e. A A. x e. A ( ph -> x = y ) ) )
Theorem	reu6i 2968*	A condition which implies existential uniqueness. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 2-Oct-2015.)
|- ( ( B e. A /\ A. x e. A ( ph <-> x = B ) ) -> E! x e. A ph )
Theorem	eqreu 2969*	A condition which implies existential uniqueness. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 2-Oct-2015.)
|- ( x = B -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( ( B e. A /\ ps /\ A. x e. A ( ph -> x = B ) ) -> E! x e. A ph )
Theorem	rmo4 2970*	Restricted "at most one" using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E* x e. A ph <-> A. x e. A A. y e. A ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> x = y ) )
Theorem	reu4 2971*	Restricted uniqueness using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-1994.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E! x e. A ph <-> ( E. x e. A ph /\ A. x e. A A. y e. A ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> x = y ) ) )
Theorem	reu7 2972*	Restricted uniqueness using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E! x e. A ph <-> ( E. x e. A ph /\ E. x e. A A. y e. A ( ps -> x = y ) ) )
Theorem	reu8 2973*	Restricted uniqueness using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E! x e. A ph <-> E. x e. A ( ph /\ A. y e. A ( ps -> x = y ) ) )
Theorem	rmo3f 2974*	Restricted "at most one" using explicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2012.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 8-Oct-2017.)
|- F/_ x A   &    |- F/_ y A   &    |- F/ y ph   =>    |- ( E* x e. A ph <-> A. x e. A A. y e. A ( ( ph /\ [ y / x ] ph ) -> x = y ) )
Theorem	rmo4f 2975*	Restricted "at most one" using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 11-Oct-2016.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 8-Mar-2017.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 8-Oct-2017.)
|- F/_ x A   &    |- F/_ y A   &    |- F/ x ps   &    |- ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E* x e. A ph <-> A. x e. A A. y e. A ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> x = y ) )
Theorem	reueq 2976*	Equality has existential uniqueness. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 1-Sep-2015.)
|- ( B e. A <-> E! x e. A x = B )
Theorem	rmoan 2977	Restricted "at most one" still holds when a conjunct is added. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
|- ( E* x e. A ph -> E* x e. A ( ps /\ ph ) )
Theorem	rmoim 2978	Restricted "at most one" is preserved through implication (note wff reversal). (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
|- ( A. x e. A ( ph -> ps ) -> ( E* x e. A ps -> E* x e. A ph ) )
Theorem	rmoimia 2979	Restricted "at most one" is preserved through implication (note wff reversal). (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
|- ( x e. A -> ( ph -> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E* x e. A ps -> E* x e. A ph )
Theorem	rmoimi2 2980	Restricted "at most one" is preserved through implication (note wff reversal). (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
|- A. x ( ( x e. A /\ ph ) -> ( x e. B /\ ps ) )   =>    |- ( E* x e. B ps -> E* x e. A ph )
Theorem	2reuswapdc 2981*	A condition allowing swap of uniqueness and existential quantifiers. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 7-Apr-2017.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
|- (DECID E. x E. y ( x e. A /\ ( y e. B /\ ph ) ) -> ( A. x e. A E* y e. B ph -> ( E! x e. A E. y e. B ph -> E! y e. B E. x e. A ph ) ) )
Theorem	reuind 2982*	Existential uniqueness via an indirect equality. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-2010.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- ( x = y -> A = B )   =>    |- ( ( A. x A. y ( ( ( A e. C /\ ph ) /\ ( B e. C /\ ps ) ) -> A = B ) /\ E. x ( A e. C /\ ph ) ) -> E! z e. C A. x ( ( A e. C /\ ph ) -> z = A ) )
Theorem	2rmorex 2983*	Double restricted quantification with "at most one," analogous to 2moex 2141. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
|- ( E* x e. A E. y e. B ph -> A. y e. B E* x e. A ph )
Theorem	nelrdva 2984*	Deduce negative membership from an implication. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 27-Nov-2017.)
|- ( ( ph /\ x e. A ) -> x =/= B )   =>    |- ( ph -> -. B e. A )
2.1.7  Conditional equality (experimental) This is a very useless definition, which "abbreviates" ( x = y -> ph ) as CondEq ( x = y -> ph ). What this display hides, though, is that the first expression, even though it has a shorter constant string, is actually much more complicated in its parse tree: it is parsed as (wi (wceq (cv vx) (cv vy)) wph), while the CondEq version is parsed as (wcdeq vx vy wph). It also allows us to give a name to the specific ternary operation ( x = y -> ph ). This is all used as part of a metatheorem: we want to say that |- ( x = y -> ( ph ( x ) <-> ph ( y ) ) ) and |- ( x = y -> A ( x ) = A ( y ) ) are provable, for any expressions ph ( x ) or A ( x ) in the language. The proof is by induction, so the base case is each of the primitives, which is why you will see a theorem for each of the set.mm primitive operations. The metatheorem comes with a disjoint variables condition: every variable in ph ( x ) is assumed disjoint from x except x itself. For such a proof by induction, we must consider each of the possible forms of ph ( x ). If it is a variable other than x, then we have CondEq ( x = y -> A = A ) or CondEq ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ph ) ), which is provable by cdeqth 2989 and reflexivity. Since we are only working with class and wff expressions, it can't be x itself in set.mm, but if it was we'd have to also prove CondEq ( x = y -> x = y ) (where set equality is being used on the right). Otherwise, it is a primitive operation applied to smaller expressions. In these cases, for each setvar variable parameter to the operation, we must consider if it is equal to x or not, which yields 2^n proof obligations. Luckily, all primitive operations in set.mm have either zero or one set variable, so we only need to prove one statement for the non-set constructors (like implication) and two for the constructors taking a set (the forall and the class builder). In each of the primitive proofs, we are allowed to assume that y is disjoint from ph ( x ) and vice versa, because this is maintained through the induction. This is how we satisfy the disjoint variable conditions of cdeqab1 2994 and cdeqab 2992.
Syntax	wcdeq 2985	Extend wff notation to include conditional equality. This is a technical device used in the proof that F/ is the not-free predicate, and that definitions are conservative as a result.
wff CondEq ( x = y -> ph )
Definition	df-cdeq 2986	Define conditional equality. All the notation to the left of the <-> is fake; the parentheses and arrows are all part of the notation, which could equally well be written CondEq x y ph. On the right side is the actual implication arrow. The reason for this definition is to "flatten" the structure on the right side (whose tree structure is something like (wi (wceq (cv vx) (cv vy)) wph) ) into just (wcdeq vx vy wph). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- (CondEq ( x = y -> ph ) <-> ( x = y -> ph ) )
Theorem	cdeqi 2987	Deduce conditional equality. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- ( x = y -> ph )   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ph )
Theorem	cdeqri 2988	Property of conditional equality. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> ph )   =>    |- ( x = y -> ph )
Theorem	cdeqth 2989	Deduce conditional equality from a theorem. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- ph   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ph )
Theorem	cdeqnot 2990	Distribute conditional equality over negation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ( -. ph <-> -. ps ) )
Theorem	cdeqal 2991*	Distribute conditional equality over quantification. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ( A. z ph <-> A. z ps ) )
Theorem	cdeqab 2992*	Distribute conditional equality over abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> { z | ph } = { z | ps } )
Theorem	cdeqal1 2993*	Distribute conditional equality over quantification. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ( A. x ph <-> A. y ps ) )
Theorem	cdeqab1 2994*	Distribute conditional equality over abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> { x | ph } = { y | ps } )
Theorem	cdeqim 2995	Distribute conditional equality over implication. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ( ch <-> th ) )   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ( ( ph -> ch ) <-> ( ps -> th ) ) )
Theorem	cdeqcv 2996	Conditional equality for set-to-class promotion. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> x = y )
Theorem	cdeqeq 2997	Distribute conditional equality over equality. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> A = B )   &    |- CondEq ( x = y -> C = D )   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ( A = C <-> B = D ) )
Theorem	cdeqel 2998	Distribute conditional equality over elementhood. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- CondEq ( x = y -> A = B )   &    |- CondEq ( x = y -> C = D )   =>    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ( A e. C <-> B e. D ) )
Theorem	nfcdeq 2999*	If we have a conditional equality proof, where ph is ph ( x ) and ps is ph ( y ), and ph ( x ) in fact does not have x free in it according to F/, then ph ( x ) <-> ph ( y ) unconditionally. This proves that F/ x ph is actually a not-free predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- F/ x ph   &    |- CondEq ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( ph <-> ps )
Theorem	nfccdeq 3000*	Variation of nfcdeq 2999 for classes. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
|- F/_ x A   &    |- CondEq ( x = y -> A = B )   =>    |- A = B