P. 43 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 4201-4300   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	trss 4201	An element of a transitive class is a subset of the class. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.)
|- ( Tr A -> ( B e. A -> B C_ A ) )
Theorem	trin 4202	The intersection of transitive classes is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 9-May-1994.)
|- ( ( Tr A /\ Tr B ) -> Tr ( A i^i B ) )
Theorem	tr0 4203	The empty set is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 16-Sep-1993.)
|- Tr (/)
Theorem	trv 4204	The universe is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 14-Sep-2003.)
|- Tr _V
Theorem	triun 4205*	The indexed union of a class of transitive sets is transitive. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Nov-2014.)
|- ( A. x e. A Tr B -> Tr U_ x e. A B )
Theorem	truni 4206*	The union of a class of transitive sets is transitive. Exercise 5(a) of [Enderton] p. 73. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 21-Feb-2011.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2014.)
|- ( A. x e. A Tr x -> Tr U. A )
Theorem	trint 4207*	The intersection of a class of transitive sets is transitive. Exercise 5(b) of [Enderton] p. 73. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 25-Feb-2011.)
|- ( A. x e. A Tr x -> Tr |^| A )
Theorem	trintssm 4208*	Any inhabited transitive class includes its intersection. Similar to Exercise 3 in [TakeutiZaring] p. 44 (which mistakenly does not include the inhabitedness hypothesis). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Aug-2018.)
|- ( ( Tr A /\ E. x x e. A ) -> |^| A C_ A )
2.2  IZF Set Theory - add the Axioms of Collection and Separation
2.2.1  Introduce the Axiom of Collection
Axiom	ax-coll 4209*	Axiom of Collection. Axiom 7 of [Crosilla], p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF" (with unnecessary quantifier removed). It is similar to bnd 4268 but uses a freeness hypothesis in place of one of the distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Aug-2018.)
|- F/ b ph   =>    |- ( A. x e. a E. y ph -> E. b A. x e. a E. y e. b ph )
Theorem	repizf 4210*	Axiom of Replacement. Axiom 7' of [Crosilla], p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF" (with unnecessary quantifier removed). In our context this is not an axiom, but a theorem proved from ax-coll 4209. It is identical to zfrep6 4211 except for the choice of a freeness hypothesis rather than a disjoint variable condition between b and ph. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Aug-2018.)
|- F/ b ph   =>    |- ( A. x e. a E! y ph -> E. b A. x e. a E. y e. b ph )
Theorem	zfrep6 4211*	A version of the Axiom of Replacement. Normally ph would have free variables x and y. Axiom 6 of [Kunen] p. 12. The Separation Scheme ax-sep 4212 cannot be derived from this version and must be stated as a separate axiom in an axiom system (such as Kunen's) that uses this version. (Contributed by NM, 10-Oct-2003.)
|- ( A. x e. z E! y ph -> E. w A. x e. z E. y e. w ph )
2.2.2  Introduce the Axiom of Separation
Axiom	ax-sep 4212*	The Axiom of Separation of IZF set theory. Axiom 6 of [Crosilla], p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF" (with unnecessary quantifier removed, and with a F/ y ph condition replaced by a disjoint variable condition between y and ph). The Separation Scheme is a weak form of Frege's Axiom of Comprehension, conditioning it (with x e. z) so that it asserts the existence of a collection only if it is smaller than some other collection z that already exists. This prevents Russell's paradox ru 3031. In some texts, this scheme is called "Aussonderung" or the Subset Axiom. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.)
|- E. y A. x ( x e. y <-> ( x e. z /\ ph ) )
Theorem	axsep2 4213*	A less restrictive version of the Separation Scheme ax-sep 4212, where variables x and z can both appear free in the wff ph, which can therefore be thought of as ph ( x , z ). This version was derived from the more restrictive ax-sep 4212 with no additional set theory axioms. (Contributed by NM, 10-Dec-2006.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.)
|- E. y A. x ( x e. y <-> ( x e. z /\ ph ) )
Theorem	zfauscl 4214*	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using a class variable. To derive this from ax-sep 4212, we invoke the Axiom of Extensionality (indirectly via vtocl 2859), which is needed for the justification of class variable notation. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- E. y A. x ( x e. y <-> ( x e. A /\ ph ) )
Theorem	bm1.3ii 4215*	Convert implication to equivalence using the Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) ax-sep 4212. Similar to Theorem 1.3ii of [BellMachover] p. 463. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
|- E. x A. y ( ph -> y e. x )   =>    |- E. x A. y ( y e. x <-> ph )
Theorem	a9evsep 4216*	Derive a weakened version of ax-i9 1579, where x and y must be distinct, from Separation ax-sep 4212 and Extensionality ax-ext 2213. The theorem -. A. x -. x = y also holds (ax9vsep 4217), but in intuitionistic logic E. x x = y is stronger. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 25-Aug-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
|- E. x x = y
Theorem	ax9vsep 4217*	Derive a weakened version of ax-9 1580, where x and y must be distinct, from Separation ax-sep 4212 and Extensionality ax-ext 2213. In intuitionistic logic a9evsep 4216 is stronger and also holds. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
|- -. A. x -. x = y
2.2.3  Derive the Null Set Axiom
Theorem	zfnuleu 4218*	Show the uniqueness of the empty set (using the Axiom of Extensionality via bm1.1 2216 to strengthen the hypothesis in the form of axnul 4219). (Contributed by NM, 22-Dec-2007.)
|- E. x A. y -. y e. x   =>    |- E! x A. y -. y e. x
Theorem	axnul 4219*	The Null Set Axiom of ZF set theory: there exists a set with no elements. Axiom of Empty Set of [Enderton] p. 18. In some textbooks, this is presented as a separate axiom; here we show it can be derived from Separation ax-sep 4212. This version of the Null Set Axiom tells us that at least one empty set exists, but does not tell us that it is unique - we need the Axiom of Extensionality to do that (see zfnuleu 4218). This theorem should not be referenced by any proof. Instead, use ax-nul 4220 below so that the uses of the Null Set Axiom can be more easily identified. (Contributed by Jeff Hoffman, 3-Feb-2008.) (Revised by NM, 4-Feb-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
|- E. x A. y -. y e. x
Axiom	ax-nul 4220*	The Null Set Axiom of IZF set theory. It was derived as axnul 4219 above and is therefore redundant, but we state it as a separate axiom here so that its uses can be identified more easily. Axiom 4 of [Crosilla] p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF". (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2003.)
|- E. x A. y -. y e. x
Theorem	0ex 4221	The Null Set Axiom of ZF set theory: the empty set exists. Corollary 5.16 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 20. For the unabbreviated version, see ax-nul 4220. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.)
|- (/) e. _V
Theorem	csbexga 4222	The existence of proper substitution into a class. (Contributed by NM, 10-Nov-2005.)
|- ( ( A e. V /\ A. x B e. W ) -> [_ A / x ]_ B e. _V )
Theorem	csbexa 4223	The existence of proper substitution into a class. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2007.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 29-Jun-2011.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- B e. _V   =>    |- [_ A / x ]_ B e. _V
2.2.4  Theorems requiring subset and intersection existence
Theorem	nalset 4224*	No set contains all sets. Theorem 41 of [Suppes] p. 30. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.)
|- -. E. x A. y y e. x
Theorem	vnex 4225	The universal class does not exist as a set. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2005.)
|- -. E. x x = _V
Theorem	vprc 4226	The universal class is not a member of itself (and thus is not a set). Proposition 5.21 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 21; our proof, however, does not depend on the Axiom of Regularity. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.)
|- -. _V e. _V
Theorem	nvel 4227	The universal class does not belong to any class. (Contributed by FL, 31-Dec-2006.)
|- -. _V e. A
Theorem	inex1 4228	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using class notation. Compare Exercise 4 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( A i^i B ) e. _V
Theorem	inex2 4229	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( B i^i A ) e. _V
Theorem	inex1g 4230	Closed-form, generalized Separation Scheme. (Contributed by NM, 7-Apr-1995.)
|- ( A e. V -> ( A i^i B ) e. _V )
Theorem	ssex 4231	The subset of a set is also a set. Exercise 3 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. This is one way to express the Axiom of Separation ax-sep 4212 (a.k.a. Subset Axiom). (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.)
|- B e. _V   =>    |- ( A C_ B -> A e. _V )
Theorem	ssexi 4232	The subset of a set is also a set. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-1993.)
|- B e. _V   &    |- A C_ B   =>    |- A e. _V
Theorem	ssexg 4233	The subset of a set is also a set. Exercise 3 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22 (generalized). (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1994.)
|- ( ( A C_ B /\ B e. C ) -> A e. _V )
Theorem	ssexd 4234	A subclass of a set is a set. Deduction form of ssexg 4233. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.)
|- ( ph -> B e. C )   &    |- ( ph -> A C_ B )   =>    |- ( ph -> A e. _V )
Theorem	prcssprc 4235	The superclass of a proper class is a proper class. (Contributed by AV, 27-Dec-2020.)
|- ( ( A C_ B /\ A e/ _V ) -> B e/ _V )
Theorem	difexg 4236	Existence of a difference. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1998.)
|- ( A e. V -> ( A \ B ) e. _V )
Theorem	zfausab 4237*	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) in terms of a class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jun-1994.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- { x | ( x e. A /\ ph ) } e. _V
Theorem	rabexg 4238*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 23-Oct-1999.)
|- ( A e. V -> { x e. A | ph } e. _V )
Theorem	rabex 4239*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jul-1996.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- { x e. A | ph } e. _V
Theorem	rabexd 4240*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction, deduction form of rabex2 4241. (Contributed by AV, 16-Jul-2019.)
|- B = { x e. A | ps }   &    |- ( ph -> A e. V )   =>    |- ( ph -> B e. _V )
Theorem	rabex2 4241*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by AV, 16-Jul-2019.) (Revised by AV, 26-Mar-2021.)
|- B = { x e. A | ps }   &    |- A e. _V   =>    |- B e. _V
Theorem	rab2ex 4242*	A class abstraction based on a class abstraction based on a set is a set. (Contributed by AV, 16-Jul-2019.) (Revised by AV, 26-Mar-2021.)
|- B = { y e. A | ps }   &    |- A e. _V   =>    |- { x e. B | ph } e. _V
Theorem	elssabg 4243*	Membership in a class abstraction involving a subset. Unlike elabg 2953, A does not have to be a set. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-2006.)
|- ( x = A -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( B e. V -> ( A e. { x | ( x C_ B /\ ph ) } <-> ( A C_ B /\ ps ) ) )
Theorem	inteximm 4244*	The intersection of an inhabited class exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.)
|- ( E. x x e. A -> |^| A e. _V )
Theorem	intexr 4245	If the intersection of a class exists, the class is nonempty. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.)
|- ( |^| A e. _V -> A =/= (/) )
Theorem	intnexr 4246	If a class intersection is the universe, it is not a set. In classical logic this would be an equivalence. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.)
|- ( |^| A = _V -> -. |^| A e. _V )
Theorem	intexabim 4247	The intersection of an inhabited class abstraction exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.)
|- ( E. x ph -> |^| { x | ph } e. _V )
Theorem	intexrabim 4248	The intersection of an inhabited restricted class abstraction exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.)
|- ( E. x e. A ph -> |^| { x e. A | ph } e. _V )
Theorem	iinexgm 4249*	The existence of an indexed union. x is normally a free-variable parameter in B, which should be read B ( x ). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Aug-2018.)
|- ( ( E. x x e. A /\ A. x e. A B e. C ) -> |^|_ x e. A B e. _V )
Theorem	inuni 4250*	The intersection of a union U. A with a class B is equal to the union of the intersections of each element of A with B. (Contributed by FL, 24-Mar-2007.)
|- ( U. A i^i B ) = U. { x | E. y e. A x = ( y i^i B ) }
Theorem	elpw2g 4251	Membership in a power class. Theorem 86 of [Suppes] p. 47. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2000.)
|- ( B e. V -> ( A e. ~P B <-> A C_ B ) )
Theorem	elpw2 4252	Membership in a power class. Theorem 86 of [Suppes] p. 47. (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2007.)
|- B e. _V   =>    |- ( A e. ~P B <-> A C_ B )
Theorem	elpwi2 4253	Membership in a power class. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 3-Mar-2021.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 26-May-2024.)
|- B e. V   &    |- A C_ B   =>    |- A e. ~P B
Theorem	if0elpw 4254	A conditional class with the False alternative being sent to the empty class is an element of the powerset of the class corresponding to the True alternative when that class is a set. This statement requires fewer axioms than the general case ifelpwung 4584. (Contributed by BJ, 5-May-2026.)
|- ( A e. V -> if ( ph , A , (/) ) e. ~P A )
Theorem	pwnss 4255	The power set of a set is never a subset. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 22-Feb-2015.)
|- ( A e. V -> -. ~P A C_ A )
Theorem	pwne 4256	No set equals its power set. The sethood antecedent is necessary; compare pwv 3897. (Contributed by NM, 17-Nov-2008.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 23-Dec-2016.)
|- ( A e. V -> ~P A =/= A )
Theorem	repizf2lem 4257	Lemma for repizf2 4258. If we have a function-like proposition which provides at most one value of y for each x in a set w, we can change "at most one" to "exactly one" by restricting the values of x to those values for which the proposition provides a value of y. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Sep-2018.)
|- ( A. x e. w E* y ph <-> A. x e. { x e. w | E. y ph } E! y ph )
Theorem	repizf2 4258*	Replacement. This version of replacement is stronger than repizf 4210 in the sense that ph does not need to map all values of x in w to a value of y. The resulting set contains those elements for which there is a value of y and in that sense, this theorem combines repizf 4210 with ax-sep 4212. Another variation would be A. x e. w E* y ph -> { y | E. x ( x e. w /\ ph ) } e. _V but we don't have a proof of that yet. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Sep-2018.)
|- F/ z ph   =>    |- ( A. x e. w E* y ph -> E. z A. x e. { x e. w | E. y ph } E. y e. z ph )
2.2.5  Theorems requiring empty set existence
Theorem	class2seteq 4259*	Equality theorem for classes and sets . (Contributed by NM, 13-Dec-2005.) (Proof shortened by Raph Levien, 30-Jun-2006.)
|- ( A e. V -> { x e. A | A e. _V } = A )
Theorem	0elpw 4260	Every power class contains the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2007.)
|- (/) e. ~P A
Theorem	0nep0 4261	The empty set and its power set are not equal. (Contributed by NM, 23-Dec-1993.)
|- (/) =/= { (/) }
Theorem	0inp0 4262	Something cannot be equal to both the null set and the power set of the null set. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2003.)
|- ( A = (/) -> -. A = { (/) } )
Theorem	unidif0 4263	The removal of the empty set from a class does not affect its union. (Contributed by NM, 22-Mar-2004.)
|- U. ( A \ { (/) } ) = U. A
Theorem	iin0imm 4264*	An indexed intersection of the empty set, with an inhabited index set, is empty. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2018.)
|- ( E. y y e. A -> |^|_ x e. A (/) = (/) )
Theorem	iin0r 4265*	If an indexed intersection of the empty set is empty, the index set is nonempty. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2018.)
|- ( |^|_ x e. A (/) = (/) -> A =/= (/) )
Theorem	intv 4266	The intersection of the universal class is empty. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2008.)
|- |^| _V = (/)
Theorem	axpweq 4267*	Two equivalent ways to express the Power Set Axiom. Note that ax-pow 4270 is not used by the proof. (Contributed by NM, 22-Jun-2009.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( ~P A e. _V <-> E. x A. y ( A. z ( z e. y -> z e. A ) -> y e. x ) )
2.2.6  Collection principle
Theorem	bnd 4268*	A very strong generalization of the Axiom of Replacement (compare zfrep6 4211). Its strength lies in the rather profound fact that ph ( x , y ) does not have to be a "function-like" wff, as it does in the standard Axiom of Replacement. This theorem is sometimes called the Boundedness Axiom. In the context of IZF, it is just a slight variation of ax-coll 4209. (Contributed by NM, 17-Oct-2004.)
|- ( A. x e. z E. y ph -> E. w A. x e. z E. y e. w ph )
Theorem	bnd2 4269*	A variant of the Boundedness Axiom bnd 4268 that picks a subset z out of a possibly proper class B in which a property is true. (Contributed by NM, 4-Feb-2004.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( A. x e. A E. y e. B ph -> E. z ( z C_ B /\ A. x e. A E. y e. z ph ) )
2.3  IZF Set Theory - add the Axioms of Power Sets and Pairing
2.3.1  Introduce the Axiom of Power Sets
Axiom	ax-pow 4270*	Axiom of Power Sets. An axiom of Intuitionistic Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. It states that a set y exists that includes the power set of a given set x i.e. contains every subset of x. This is Axiom 8 of [Crosilla] p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF" except (a) unnecessary quantifiers are removed, and (b) Crosilla has a biconditional rather than an implication (but the two are equivalent by bm1.3ii 4215). The variant axpow2 4272 uses explicit subset notation. A version using class notation is pwex 4279. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
|- E. y A. z ( A. w ( w e. z -> w e. x ) -> z e. y )
Theorem	zfpow 4271*	Axiom of Power Sets expressed with the fewest number of different variables. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-2003.)
|- E. x A. y ( A. x ( x e. y -> x e. z ) -> y e. x )
Theorem	axpow2 4272*	A variant of the Axiom of Power Sets ax-pow 4270 using subset notation. Problem in {BellMachover] p. 466. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-2006.)
|- E. y A. z ( z C_ x -> z e. y )
Theorem	axpow3 4273*	A variant of the Axiom of Power Sets ax-pow 4270. For any set x, there exists a set y whose members are exactly the subsets of x i.e. the power set of x. Axiom Pow of [BellMachover] p. 466. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-2006.)
|- E. y A. z ( z C_ x <-> z e. y )
Theorem	el 4274*	Every set is an element of some other set. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
|- E. y x e. y
Theorem	vpwex 4275	Power set axiom: the powerclass of a set is a set. Axiom 4 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 17. (Contributed by NM, 30-Oct-2003.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) Revised to prove pwexg 4276 from vpwex 4275. (Revised by BJ, 10-Aug-2022.)
|- ~P x e. _V
Theorem	pwexg 4276	Power set axiom expressed in class notation, with the sethood requirement as an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 30-Oct-2003.)
|- ( A e. V -> ~P A e. _V )
Theorem	pwexd 4277	Deduction version of the power set axiom. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 26-Jun-2021.)
|- ( ph -> A e. V )   =>    |- ( ph -> ~P A e. _V )
Theorem	abssexg 4278*	Existence of a class of subsets. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jul-2006.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
|- ( A e. V -> { x | ( x C_ A /\ ph ) } e. _V )
Theorem	pwex 4279	Power set axiom expressed in class notation. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ~P A e. _V
Theorem	snexg 4280	A singleton whose element exists is a set. The A e. _V case of Theorem 7.12 of [Quine] p. 51, proved using only Extensionality, Power Set, and Separation. Replacement is not needed. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Sep-2018.)
|- ( A e. V -> { A } e. _V )
Theorem	snex 4281	A singleton whose element exists is a set. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-May-2019.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- { A } e. _V
Theorem	snexprc 4282	A singleton whose element is a proper class is a set. The -. A e. _V case of Theorem 7.12 of [Quine] p. 51, proved using only Extensionality, Power Set, and Separation. Replacement is not needed. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Sep-2018.)
|- ( -. A e. _V -> { A } e. _V )
Theorem	notnotsnex 4283	A singleton is never a proper class. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 3-Jul-2022.)
|- -. -. { A } e. _V
Theorem	p0ex 4284	The power set of the empty set (the ordinal 1) is a set. (Contributed by NM, 23-Dec-1993.)
|- { (/) } e. _V
Theorem	pp0ex 4285	{ (/) , { (/) } } (the ordinal 2) is a set. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
|- { (/) , { (/) } } e. _V
Theorem	ord3ex 4286	The ordinal number 3 is a set, proved without the Axiom of Union. (Contributed by NM, 2-May-2009.)
|- { (/) , { (/) } , { (/) , { (/) } } } e. _V
Theorem	dtruarb 4287*	At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). This theorem asserts the existence of two sets which do not equal each other; compare with dtruex 4663 in which we are given a set y and go from there to a set x which is not equal to it. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Sep-2018.)
|- E. x E. y -. x = y
Theorem	pwuni 4288	A class is a subclass of the power class of its union. Exercise 6(b) of [Enderton] p. 38. (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-1996.)
|- A C_ ~P U. A
Theorem	undifexmid 4289*	Union of complementary parts producing the whole and excluded middle. Although special cases such as undifss 3577 and undifdcss 7158 are provable, the full statement implies excluded middle as shown here. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 16-Jun-2022.)
|- ( x C_ y <-> ( x u. ( y \ x ) ) = y )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
2.3.2  A notation for excluded middle
Syntax	wem 4290	Formula for an abbreviation of excluded middle.
wff EXMID
Definition	df-exmid 4291	The expression EXMID will be used as a readable shorthand for any form of the law of the excluded middle; this is a useful shorthand largely because it hides statements of the form "for any proposition" in a system which can only quantify over sets, not propositions. To see how this compares with other ways of expressing excluded middle, compare undifexmid 4289 with exmidundif 4302. The former may be more recognizable as excluded middle because it is in terms of propositions, and the proof may be easier to follow for much the same reason (it just has to show ph and -. ph in the the relevant parts of the proof). The latter, however, has the key advantage of being able to prove both directions of the biconditional. To state that excluded middle implies a proposition is hard to do gracefully without EXMID, because there is no way to write a hypothesis ph \/ -. ph for an arbitrary proposition; instead the hypothesis would need to be the particular instance of excluded middle which that proof needs. Or to say it another way, EXMID implies DECID ph by exmidexmid 4292 but there is no good way to express the converse. This definition and how we use it is easiest to understand (and most appropriate to assign the name "excluded middle" to) if we assume ax-sep 4212, in which case EXMID means that all propositions are decidable (see exmidexmid 4292 and notice that it relies on ax-sep 4212). If we instead work with ax-bdsep 16583, EXMID as defined here means that all bounded propositions are decidable. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
|- (EXMID <-> A. x ( x C_ { (/) } -> DECID (/) e. x ) )
Theorem	exmidexmid 4292	EXMID implies that an arbitrary proposition is decidable. That is, EXMID captures the usual meaning of excluded middle when stated in terms of propositions. To get other propositional statements which are equivalent to excluded middle, combine this with notnotrdc 851, peircedc 922, or condc 861. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
|- (EXMID -> DECID ph )
Theorem	ss1o0el1 4293	A subclass of { (/) } contains the empty set if and only if it equals { (/) }. (Contributed by BJ and Jim Kingdon, 9-Aug-2024.)
|- ( A C_ { (/) } -> ( (/) e. A <-> A = { (/) } ) )
Theorem	exmid01 4294	Excluded middle is equivalent to saying any subset of { (/) } is either (/) or { (/) }. (Contributed by BJ and Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
|- (EXMID <-> A. x ( x C_ { (/) } -> ( x = (/) \/ x = { (/) } ) ) )
Theorem	pwntru 4295	A slight strengthening of pwtrufal 16702. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 12-Sep-2023.)
|- ( ( A C_ { (/) } /\ A =/= { (/) } ) -> A = (/) )
Theorem	exmid1dc 4296*	A convenience theorem for proving that something implies EXMID. Think of this as an alternative to using a proposition, as in proofs like undifexmid 4289 or ordtriexmid 4625. In this context x = { (/) } can be thought of as "x is true". (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Nov-2023.)
|- ( ( ph /\ x C_ { (/) } ) -> DECID x = { (/) } )   =>    |- ( ph -> EXMID )
Theorem	exmidn0m 4297*	Excluded middle is equivalent to any set being empty or inhabited. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-Mar-2023.)
|- (EXMID <-> A. x ( x = (/) \/ E. y y e. x ) )
Theorem	exmidsssn 4298*	Excluded middle is equivalent to the biconditionalized version of sssnr 3841 for sets. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-Mar-2023.)
|- (EXMID <-> A. x A. y ( x C_ { y } <-> ( x = (/) \/ x = { y } ) ) )
Theorem	exmidsssnc 4299*	Excluded middle in terms of subsets of a singleton. This is similar to exmid01 4294 but lets you choose any set as the element of the singleton rather than just (/). It is similar to exmidsssn 4298 but for a particular set B rather than all sets. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Jul-2023.)
|- ( B e. V -> (EXMID <-> A. x ( x C_ { B } -> ( x = (/) \/ x = { B } ) ) ) )
Theorem	exmid0el 4300	Excluded middle is equivalent to decidability of (/) being an element of an arbitrary set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
|- (EXMID <-> A. xDECID (/) e. x )