P. 45 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 4401-4500   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	ssopab2i 4401	Inference of ordered pair abstraction subclass from implication. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1995.)
|- ( ph -> ps )   =>    |- { <. x , y >. | ph } C_ { <. x , y >. | ps }
Theorem	ssopab2dv 4402*	Inference of ordered pair abstraction subclass from implication. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jan-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps -> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> { <. x , y >. | ps } C_ { <. x , y >. | ch } )
Theorem	eqopab2b 4403	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction equality and biconditional. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Jan-2017.)
|- ( { <. x , y >. | ph } = { <. x , y >. | ps } <-> A. x A. y ( ph <-> ps ) )
Theorem	opabm 4404*	Inhabited ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Sep-2018.)
|- ( E. z z e. { <. x , y >. | ph } <-> E. x E. y ph )
Theorem	iunopab 4405*	Move indexed union inside an ordered-pair abstraction. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Feb-2015.)
|- U_ z e. A { <. x , y >. | ph } = { <. x , y >. | E. z e. A ph }
Theorem	elopabr 4406*	Membership in an ordered-pair class abstraction defined by a binary relation. (Contributed by AV, 16-Feb-2021.) (Proof shortened by SN, 11-Dec-2024.)
|- ( A e. { <. x , y >. | x R y } -> A e. R )
Theorem	elopabran 4407*	Membership in an ordered-pair class abstraction defined by a restricted binary relation. (Contributed by AV, 16-Feb-2021.)
|- ( A e. { <. x , y >. | ( x R y /\ ps ) } -> A e. R )
2.3.6  Power class of union and intersection
Theorem	pwin 4408	The power class of the intersection of two classes is the intersection of their power classes. Exercise 4.12(j) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.)
|- ~P ( A i^i B ) = ( ~P A i^i ~P B )
Theorem	pwunss 4409	The power class of the union of two classes includes the union of their power classes. Exercise 4.12(k) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.)
|- ( ~P A u. ~P B ) C_ ~P ( A u. B )
Theorem	pwssunim 4410	The power class of the union of two classes is a subset of the union of their power classes, if one class is a subclass of the other. One direction of Exercise 4.12(l) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Sep-2018.)
|- ( ( A C_ B \/ B C_ A ) -> ~P ( A u. B ) C_ ( ~P A u. ~P B ) )
Theorem	pwundifss 4411	Break up the power class of a union into a union of smaller classes. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Sep-2018.)
|- ( ( ~P ( A u. B ) \ ~P A ) u. ~P A ) C_ ~P ( A u. B )
Theorem	pwunim 4412	The power class of the union of two classes equals the union of their power classes, iff one class is a subclass of the other. Part of Exercise 7(b) of [Enderton] p. 28. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Sep-2018.)
|- ( ( A C_ B \/ B C_ A ) -> ~P ( A u. B ) = ( ~P A u. ~P B ) )
2.3.7  Epsilon and identity relations
Syntax	cep 4413	Extend class notation to include the epsilon relation.
class _E
Syntax	cid 4414	Extend the definition of a class to include identity relation.
class _I
Definition	df-eprel 4415*	Define the epsilon relation. Similar to Definition 6.22 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 30. The epsilon relation and set membership are the same, that is, ( A _E B <-> A e. B ) when B is a set by epelg 4416. Thus, 5 _E { 1 , 5 }. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.)
|- _E = { <. x , y >. | x e. y }
Theorem	epelg 4416	The epsilon relation and membership are the same. General version of epel 4418. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 27-Mar-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.)
|- ( B e. V -> ( A _E B <-> A e. B ) )
Theorem	epelc 4417	The epsilon relationship and the membership relation are the same. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 11-Apr-2012.)
|- B e. _V   =>    |- ( A _E B <-> A e. B )
Theorem	epel 4418	The epsilon relation and the membership relation are the same. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.)
|- ( x _E y <-> x e. y )
Definition	df-id 4419*	Define the identity relation. Definition 9.15 of [Quine] p. 64. For example, 5 _I 5 and -. 4 _I 5. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.)
|- _I = { <. x , y >. | x = y }
2.3.8  Partial and total orderings We have not yet defined relations (df-rel 4761), but here we introduce a few related notions we will use to develop ordinals. The class variable R is no different from other class variables, but it reminds us that typically it represents what we will later call a "relation".
Syntax	wpo 4420	Extend wff notation to include the strict partial ordering predicate. Read: ' R is a partial order on A.'
wff R Po A
Syntax	wor 4421	Extend wff notation to include the strict linear ordering predicate. Read: ' R orders A.'
wff R Or A
Definition	df-po 4422*	Define the strict partial order predicate. Definition of [Enderton] p. 168. The expression R Po A means R is a partial order on A. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.)
|- ( R Po A <-> A. x e. A A. y e. A A. z e. A ( -. x R x /\ ( ( x R y /\ y R z ) -> x R z ) ) )
Definition	df-iso 4423*	Define the strict linear order predicate. The expression R Or A is true if relationship R orders A. The property x R y -> ( x R z \/ z R y ) is called weak linearity by Proposition 11.2.3 of [HoTT], p. (varies). If we assumed excluded middle, it would be equivalent to trichotomy, x R y \/ x = y \/ y R x. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) (Revised by Jim Kingdon, 4-Oct-2018.)
|- ( R Or A <-> ( R Po A /\ A. x e. A A. y e. A A. z e. A ( x R y -> ( x R z \/ z R y ) ) ) )
Theorem	poss 4424	Subset theorem for the partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.)
|- ( A C_ B -> ( R Po B -> R Po A ) )
Theorem	poeq1 4425	Equality theorem for partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
|- ( R = S -> ( R Po A <-> S Po A ) )
Theorem	poeq2 4426	Equality theorem for partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
|- ( A = B -> ( R Po A <-> R Po B ) )
Theorem	nfpo 4427	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for partial orders. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.)
|- F/_ x R   &    |- F/_ x A   =>    |- F/ x R Po A
Theorem	nfso 4428	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for total orders. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.)
|- F/_ x R   &    |- F/_ x A   =>    |- F/ x R Or A
Theorem	pocl 4429	Properties of partial order relation in class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
|- ( R Po A -> ( ( B e. A /\ C e. A /\ D e. A ) -> ( -. B R B /\ ( ( B R C /\ C R D ) -> B R D ) ) ) )
Theorem	ispod 4430*	Sufficient conditions for a partial order. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2014.)
|- ( ( ph /\ x e. A ) -> -. x R x )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ( x e. A /\ y e. A /\ z e. A ) ) -> ( ( x R y /\ y R z ) -> x R z ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> R Po A )
Theorem	swopolem 4431*	Perform the substitutions into the strict weak ordering law. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Dec-2014.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ( x e. A /\ y e. A /\ z e. A ) ) -> ( x R y -> ( x R z \/ z R y ) ) )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ( X e. A /\ Y e. A /\ Z e. A ) ) -> ( X R Y -> ( X R Z \/ Z R Y ) ) )
Theorem	swopo 4432*	A strict weak order is a partial order. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ( y e. A /\ z e. A ) ) -> ( y R z -> -. z R y ) )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ( x e. A /\ y e. A /\ z e. A ) ) -> ( x R y -> ( x R z \/ z R y ) ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> R Po A )
Theorem	poirr 4433	A partial order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
|- ( ( R Po A /\ B e. A ) -> -. B R B )
Theorem	potr 4434	A partial order relation is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
|- ( ( R Po A /\ ( B e. A /\ C e. A /\ D e. A ) ) -> ( ( B R C /\ C R D ) -> B R D ) )
Theorem	po2nr 4435	A partial order relation has no 2-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
|- ( ( R Po A /\ ( B e. A /\ C e. A ) ) -> -. ( B R C /\ C R B ) )
Theorem	po3nr 4436	A partial order relation has no 3-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
|- ( ( R Po A /\ ( B e. A /\ C e. A /\ D e. A ) ) -> -. ( B R C /\ C R D /\ D R B ) )
Theorem	po0 4437	Any relation is a partial ordering of the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
|- R Po (/)
Theorem	pofun 4438*	A function preserves a partial order relation. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 18-Jun-2011.)
|- S = { <. x , y >. | X R Y }   &    |- ( x = y -> X = Y )   =>    |- ( ( R Po B /\ A. x e. A X e. B ) -> S Po A )
Theorem	sopo 4439	A strict linear order is a strict partial order. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.)
|- ( R Or A -> R Po A )
Theorem	soss 4440	Subset theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
|- ( A C_ B -> ( R Or B -> R Or A ) )
Theorem	soeq1 4441	Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.)
|- ( R = S -> ( R Or A <-> S Or A ) )
Theorem	soeq2 4442	Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.)
|- ( A = B -> ( R Or A <-> R Or B ) )
Theorem	sonr 4443	A strict order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-1995.)
|- ( ( R Or A /\ B e. A ) -> -. B R B )
Theorem	sotr 4444	A strict order relation is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.)
|- ( ( R Or A /\ ( B e. A /\ C e. A /\ D e. A ) ) -> ( ( B R C /\ C R D ) -> B R D ) )
Theorem	issod 4445*	An irreflexive, transitive, trichotomous relation is a linear ordering (in the sense of df-iso 4423). (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.)
|- ( ph -> R Po A )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ( x e. A /\ y e. A ) ) -> ( x R y \/ x = y \/ y R x ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> R Or A )
Theorem	sowlin 4446	A strict order relation satisfies weak linearity. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Oct-2018.)
|- ( ( R Or A /\ ( B e. A /\ C e. A /\ D e. A ) ) -> ( B R C -> ( B R D \/ D R C ) ) )
Theorem	so2nr 4447	A strict order relation has no 2-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.)
|- ( ( R Or A /\ ( B e. A /\ C e. A ) ) -> -. ( B R C /\ C R B ) )
Theorem	so3nr 4448	A strict order relation has no 3-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.)
|- ( ( R Or A /\ ( B e. A /\ C e. A /\ D e. A ) ) -> -. ( B R C /\ C R D /\ D R B ) )
Theorem	sotricim 4449	One direction of sotritric 4450 holds for all weakly linear orders. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Sep-2019.)
|- ( ( R Or A /\ ( B e. A /\ C e. A ) ) -> ( B R C -> -. ( B = C \/ C R B ) ) )
Theorem	sotritric 4450	A trichotomy relationship, given a trichotomous order. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Sep-2019.)
|- R Or A   &    |- ( ( B e. A /\ C e. A ) -> ( B R C \/ B = C \/ C R B ) )   =>    |- ( ( B e. A /\ C e. A ) -> ( B R C <-> -. ( B = C \/ C R B ) ) )
Theorem	sotritrieq 4451	A trichotomy relationship, given a trichotomous order. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 13-Dec-2019.)
|- R Or A   &    |- ( ( B e. A /\ C e. A ) -> ( B R C \/ B = C \/ C R B ) )   =>    |- ( ( B e. A /\ C e. A ) -> ( B = C <-> -. ( B R C \/ C R B ) ) )
Theorem	so0 4452	Any relation is a strict ordering of the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
|- R Or (/)
2.3.9  Founded and set-like relations
Syntax	wfrfor 4453	Extend wff notation to include the well-founded predicate.
wff FrFor R A S
Syntax	wfr 4454	Extend wff notation to include the well-founded predicate. Read: ' R is a well-founded relation on A.'
wff R Fr A
Syntax	wse 4455	Extend wff notation to include the set-like predicate. Read: ' R is set-like on A.'
wff R Se A
Syntax	wwe 4456	Extend wff notation to include the well-ordering predicate. Read: ' R well-orders A.'
wff R We A
Definition	df-frfor 4457*	Define the well-founded relation predicate where A might be a proper class. By passing in S we allow it potentially to be a proper class rather than a set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon and Mario Carneiro, 22-Sep-2021.)
|- (FrFor R A S <-> ( A. x e. A ( A. y e. A ( y R x -> y e. S ) -> x e. S ) -> A C_ S ) )
Definition	df-frind 4458*	Define the well-founded relation predicate. In the presence of excluded middle, there are a variety of equivalent ways to define this. In our case, this definition, in terms of an inductive principle, works better than one along the lines of "there is an element which is minimal when A is ordered by R". Because s is constrained to be a set (not a proper class) here, sometimes it may be necessary to use FrFor directly rather than via Fr. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon and Mario Carneiro, 21-Sep-2021.)
|- ( R Fr A <-> A. sFrFor R A s )
Definition	df-se 4459*	Define the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Nov-2014.)
|- ( R Se A <-> A. x e. A { y e. A | y R x } e. _V )
Definition	df-wetr 4460*	Define the well-ordering predicate. It is unusual to define "well-ordering" in the absence of excluded middle, but we mean an ordering which is like the ordering which we have for ordinals (for example, it does not entail trichotomy because ordinals do not have that as seen at ordtriexmid 4648). Given excluded middle, well-ordering is usually defined to require trichotomy (and the definition of Fr is typically also different). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 23-Sep-2021.)
|- ( R We A <-> ( R Fr A /\ A. x e. A A. y e. A A. z e. A ( ( x R y /\ y R z ) -> x R z ) ) )
Theorem	seex 4461*	The R-preimage of an element of the base set in a set-like relation is a set. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Nov-2014.)
|- ( ( R Se A /\ B e. A ) -> { x e. A | x R B } e. _V )
Theorem	exse 4462	Any relation on a set is set-like on it. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 22-Jun-2015.)
|- ( A e. V -> R Se A )
Theorem	sess1 4463	Subset theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.)
|- ( R C_ S -> ( S Se A -> R Se A ) )
Theorem	sess2 4464	Subset theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.)
|- ( A C_ B -> ( R Se B -> R Se A ) )
Theorem	seeq1 4465	Equality theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.)
|- ( R = S -> ( R Se A <-> S Se A ) )
Theorem	seeq2 4466	Equality theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.)
|- ( A = B -> ( R Se A <-> R Se B ) )
Theorem	nfse 4467	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for set-like relations. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.)
|- F/_ x R   &    |- F/_ x A   =>    |- F/ x R Se A
Theorem	epse 4468	The epsilon relation is set-like on any class. (This is the origin of the term "set-like": a set-like relation "acts like" the epsilon relation of sets and their elements.) (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 22-Jun-2015.)
|- _E Se A
Theorem	frforeq1 4469	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.)
|- ( R = S -> (FrFor R A T <-> FrFor S A T ) )
Theorem	freq1 4470	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1997.)
|- ( R = S -> ( R Fr A <-> S Fr A ) )
Theorem	frforeq2 4471	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.)
|- ( A = B -> (FrFor R A T <-> FrFor R B T ) )
Theorem	freq2 4472	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.)
|- ( A = B -> ( R Fr A <-> R Fr B ) )
Theorem	frforeq3 4473	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.)
|- ( S = T -> (FrFor R A S <-> FrFor R A T ) )
Theorem	nffrfor 4474	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for well-founded relations. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.)
|- F/_ x R   &    |- F/_ x A   &    |- F/_ x S   =>    |- F/ xFrFor R A S
Theorem	nffr 4475	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for well-founded relations. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.)
|- F/_ x R   &    |- F/_ x A   =>    |- F/ x R Fr A
Theorem	frirrg 4476	A well-founded relation is irreflexive. This is the case where A exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Sep-2021.)
|- ( ( R Fr A /\ A e. V /\ B e. A ) -> -. B R B )
Theorem	fr0 4477	Any relation is well-founded on the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.)
|- R Fr (/)
Theorem	frind 4478*	Induction over a well-founded set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Sep-2021.)
|- ( x = y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   &    |- ( ( ch /\ x e. A ) -> ( A. y e. A ( y R x -> ps ) -> ph ) )   &    |- ( ch -> R Fr A )   &    |- ( ch -> A e. V )   =>    |- ( ( ch /\ x e. A ) -> ph )
Theorem	efrirr 4479	Irreflexivity of the epsilon relation: a class founded by epsilon is not a member of itself. (Contributed by NM, 18-Apr-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 22-Jun-2015.)
|- ( _E Fr A -> -. A e. A )
Theorem	tz7.2 4480	Similar to Theorem 7.2 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 35, of except that the Axiom of Regularity is not required due to antecedent _E Fr A. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-1994.)
|- ( ( Tr A /\ _E Fr A /\ B e. A ) -> ( B C_ A /\ B =/= A ) )
Theorem	nfwe 4481	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for well-orderings. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.)
|- F/_ x R   &    |- F/_ x A   =>    |- F/ x R We A
Theorem	weeq1 4482	Equality theorem for the well-ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1997.)
|- ( R = S -> ( R We A <-> S We A ) )
Theorem	weeq2 4483	Equality theorem for the well-ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.)
|- ( A = B -> ( R We A <-> R We B ) )
Theorem	wefr 4484	A well-ordering is well-founded. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.)
|- ( R We A -> R Fr A )
Theorem	wepo 4485	A well-ordering is a partial ordering. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Sep-2021.)
|- ( ( R We A /\ A e. V ) -> R Po A )
Theorem	wetrep 4486*	An epsilon well-ordering is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.)
|- ( ( _E We A /\ ( x e. A /\ y e. A /\ z e. A ) ) -> ( ( x e. y /\ y e. z ) -> x e. z ) )
Theorem	we0 4487	Any relation is a well-ordering of the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.)
|- R We (/)
2.3.10  Ordinals
Syntax	word 4488	Extend the definition of a wff to include the ordinal predicate.
wff Ord A
Syntax	con0 4489	Extend the definition of a class to include the class of all ordinal numbers. (The 0 in the name prevents creating a file called con.html, which causes problems in Windows.)
class On
Syntax	wlim 4490	Extend the definition of a wff to include the limit ordinal predicate.
wff Lim A
Syntax	csuc 4491	Extend class notation to include the successor function.
class suc A
Definition	df-iord 4492*	Define the ordinal predicate, which is true for a class that is transitive and whose elements are transitive. Definition of ordinal in [Crosilla], p. "Set-theoretic principles incompatible with intuitionistic logic". Some sources will define a notation for ordinal order corresponding to < and <_ but we just use e. and C_ respectively. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 10-Oct-2018.) Use its alias dford3 4493 instead for naming consistency with set.mm. (New usage is discouraged.)
|- ( Ord A <-> ( Tr A /\ A. x e. A Tr x ) )
Theorem	dford3 4493*	Alias for df-iord 4492. Use it instead of df-iord 4492 for naming consistency with set.mm. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 10-Oct-2018.)
|- ( Ord A <-> ( Tr A /\ A. x e. A Tr x ) )
Definition	df-on 4494	Define the class of all ordinal numbers. Definition 7.11 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 38. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.)
|- On = { x | Ord x }
Definition	df-ilim 4495	Define the limit ordinal predicate, which is true for an ordinal that has the empty set as an element and is not a successor (i.e. that is the union of itself). Our definition combines the definition of Lim of [BellMachover] p. 471 and Exercise 1 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 42, and then changes A =/= (/) to (/) e. A (which would be equivalent given the law of the excluded middle, but which is not for us). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 11-Nov-2018.) Use its alias dflim2 4496 instead for naming consistency with set.mm. (New usage is discouraged.)
|- ( Lim A <-> ( Ord A /\ (/) e. A /\ A = U. A ) )
Theorem	dflim2 4496	Alias for df-ilim 4495. Use it instead of df-ilim 4495 for naming consistency with set.mm. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2004.)
|- ( Lim A <-> ( Ord A /\ (/) e. A /\ A = U. A ) )
Definition	df-suc 4497	Define the successor of a class. When applied to an ordinal number, the successor means the same thing as "plus 1". Definition 7.22 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 41, who use "+ 1" to denote this function. Our definition is a generalization to classes. Although it is not conventional to use it with proper classes, it has no effect on a proper class (sucprc 4538). Some authors denote the successor operation with a prime (apostrophe-like) symbol, such as Definition 6 of [Suppes] p. 134 and the definition of successor in [Mendelson] p. 246 (who uses the symbol "Suc" as a predicate to mean "is a successor ordinal"). The definition of successor of [Enderton] p. 68 denotes the operation with a plus-sign superscript. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.)
|- suc A = ( A u. { A } )
Theorem	ordeq 4498	Equality theorem for the ordinal predicate. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.)
|- ( A = B -> ( Ord A <-> Ord B ) )
Theorem	elong 4499	An ordinal number is an ordinal set. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.)
|- ( A e. V -> ( A e. On <-> Ord A ) )
Theorem	elon 4500	An ordinal number is an ordinal set. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( A e. On <-> Ord A )