P. 47 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 4601-4700   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	iunpw 4601*	An indexed union of a power class in terms of the power class of the union of its index. Part of Exercise 24(b) of [Enderton] p. 33. (Contributed by NM, 29-Nov-2003.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( E. x e. A x = U. A <-> ~P U. A = U_ x e. A ~P x )
Theorem	ifelpwung 4602	Existence of a conditional class, quantitative version (closed form). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.)
|- ( ( A e. V /\ B e. W ) -> if ( ph , A , B ) e. ~P ( A u. B ) )
Theorem	ifelpwund 4603	Existence of a conditional class, quantitative version (deduction form). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.)
|- ( ph -> A e. V )   &    |- ( ph -> B e. W )   =>    |- ( ph -> if ( ps , A , B ) e. ~P ( A u. B ) )
Theorem	ifelpwun 4604	Existence of a conditional class, quantitative version (inference form). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- B e. _V   =>    |- if ( ph , A , B ) e. ~P ( A u. B )
Theorem	ifexd 4605	Existence of a conditional class (deduction form). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.)
|- ( ph -> A e. V )   &    |- ( ph -> B e. W )   =>    |- ( ph -> if ( ps , A , B ) e. _V )
Theorem	ifexg 4606	Existence of the conditional operator (closed form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 1-Sep-2022.)
|- ( ( A e. V /\ B e. W ) -> if ( ph , A , B ) e. _V )
Theorem	ifex 4607	Existence of the conditional operator (inference form). (Contributed by NM, 2-Sep-2004.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- B e. _V   =>    |- if ( ph , A , B ) e. _V
2.4.2  Ordinals (continued)
Theorem	ordon 4608	The class of all ordinal numbers is ordinal. Proposition 7.12 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 38, but without using the Axiom of Regularity. (Contributed by NM, 17-May-1994.)
|- Ord On
Theorem	ssorduni 4609	The union of a class of ordinal numbers is ordinal. Proposition 7.19 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 40. (Contributed by NM, 30-May-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.)
|- ( A C_ On -> Ord U. A )
Theorem	ssonuni 4610	The union of a set of ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. Theorem 9 of [Suppes] p. 132. (Contributed by NM, 1-Nov-2003.)
|- ( A e. V -> ( A C_ On -> U. A e. On ) )
Theorem	ssonunii 4611	The union of a set of ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. Corollary 7N(d) of [Enderton] p. 193. (Contributed by NM, 20-Sep-2003.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( A C_ On -> U. A e. On )
Theorem	onun2 4612	The union of two ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 25-Jul-2019.)
|- ( ( A e. On /\ B e. On ) -> ( A u. B ) e. On )
Theorem	onun2i 4613	The union of two ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jun-1994.) (Constructive proof by Jim Kingdon, 25-Jul-2019.)
|- A e. On   &    |- B e. On   =>    |- ( A u. B ) e. On
Theorem	ordsson 4614	Any ordinal class is a subclass of the class of ordinal numbers. Corollary 7.15 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 38. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-1994.)
|- ( Ord A -> A C_ On )
Theorem	onss 4615	An ordinal number is a subset of the class of ordinal numbers. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.)
|- ( A e. On -> A C_ On )
Theorem	onuni 4616	The union of an ordinal number is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 29-Sep-2006.)
|- ( A e. On -> U. A e. On )
Theorem	orduni 4617	The union of an ordinal class is ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 12-Sep-2003.)
|- ( Ord A -> Ord U. A )
Theorem	bm2.5ii 4618*	Problem 2.5(ii) of [BellMachover] p. 471. (Contributed by NM, 20-Sep-2003.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- ( A C_ On -> U. A = |^| { x e. On | A. y e. A y C_ x } )
Theorem	sucexb 4619	A successor exists iff its class argument exists. (Contributed by NM, 22-Jun-1998.)
|- ( A e. _V <-> suc A e. _V )
Theorem	sucexg 4620	The successor of a set is a set (generalization). (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.)
|- ( A e. V -> suc A e. _V )
Theorem	sucex 4621	The successor of a set is a set. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.)
|- A e. _V   =>    |- suc A e. _V
Theorem	ordsucim 4622	The successor of an ordinal class is ordinal. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 8-Nov-2018.)
|- ( Ord A -> Ord suc A )
Theorem	onsuc 4623	The successor of an ordinal number is an ordinal number. Closed form of onsuci 4638. Forward implication of onsucb 4625. Proposition 7.24 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 41. (Contributed by NM, 6-Jun-1994.)
|- ( A e. On -> suc A e. On )
Theorem	ordsucg 4624	The successor of an ordinal class is ordinal. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 20-Nov-2018.)
|- ( A e. _V -> ( Ord A <-> Ord suc A ) )
Theorem	onsucb 4625	A class is an ordinal number if and only if its successor is an ordinal number. Biconditional form of onsuc 4623. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-2003.)
|- ( A e. On <-> suc A e. On )
Theorem	ordsucss 4626	The successor of an element of an ordinal class is a subset of it. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1998.)
|- ( Ord B -> ( A e. B -> suc A C_ B ) )
Theorem	ordelsuc 4627	A set belongs to an ordinal iff its successor is a subset of the ordinal. Exercise 8 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 42 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 29-Nov-2003.)
|- ( ( A e. C /\ Ord B ) -> ( A e. B <-> suc A C_ B ) )
Theorem	onsucssi 4628	A set belongs to an ordinal number iff its successor is a subset of the ordinal number. Exercise 8 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 42 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 16-Sep-1995.)
|- A e. On   &    |- B e. On   =>    |- ( A e. B <-> suc A C_ B )
Theorem	onsucmin 4629*	The successor of an ordinal number is the smallest larger ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 28-Nov-2003.)
|- ( A e. On -> suc A = |^| { x e. On | A e. x } )
Theorem	onsucelsucr 4630	Membership is inherited by predecessors. The converse, for all ordinals, implies excluded middle, as shown at onsucelsucexmid 4652. However, the converse does hold where B is a natural number, as seen at nnsucelsuc 6724. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 17-Jul-2019.)
|- ( B e. On -> ( suc A e. suc B -> A e. B ) )
Theorem	onsucsssucr 4631	The subclass relationship between two ordinals is inherited by their predecessors. The converse implies excluded middle, as shown at onsucsssucexmid 4649. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 29-Jul-2019.)
|- ( ( A e. On /\ Ord B ) -> ( suc A C_ suc B -> A C_ B ) )
Theorem	sucunielr 4632	Successor and union. The converse (where B is an ordinal) implies excluded middle, as seen at ordsucunielexmid 4653. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.)
|- ( suc A e. B -> A e. U. B )
Theorem	unon 4633	The class of all ordinal numbers is its own union. Exercise 11 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 40. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2003.)
|- U. On = On
Theorem	onuniss2 4634*	The union of the ordinal subsets of an ordinal number is that number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.)
|- ( A e. On -> U. { x e. On | x C_ A } = A )
Theorem	limon 4635	The class of ordinal numbers is a limit ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 24-Mar-1995.)
|- Lim On
Theorem	ordunisuc2r 4636*	An ordinal which contains the successor of each of its members is equal to its union. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 14-Nov-2018.)
|- ( Ord A -> ( A. x e. A suc x e. A -> A = U. A ) )
Theorem	onssi 4637	An ordinal number is a subset of On. (Contributed by NM, 11-Aug-1994.)
|- A e. On   =>    |- A C_ On
Theorem	onsuci 4638	The successor of an ordinal number is an ordinal number. Inference associated with onsuc 4623 and onsucb 4625. Corollary 7N(c) of [Enderton] p. 193. (Contributed by NM, 12-Jun-1994.)
|- A e. On   =>    |- suc A e. On
Theorem	onintonm 4639*	The intersection of an inhabited collection of ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. Compare Exercise 6 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 44. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 30-Aug-2021.)
|- ( ( A C_ On /\ E. x x e. A ) -> |^| A e. On )
Theorem	onintrab2im 4640	An existence condition which implies an intersection is an ordinal number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Aug-2021.)
|- ( E. x e. On ph -> |^| { x e. On | ph } e. On )
Theorem	ordtriexmidlem 4641	Lemma for decidability and ordinals. The set { x e. { (/) } | ph } is a way of connecting statements about ordinals (such as trichotomy in ordtriexmid 4643 or weak linearity in ordsoexmid 4684) with a proposition ph. Our lemma states that it is an ordinal number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jan-2019.)
|- { x e. { (/) } | ph } e. On
Theorem	ordtriexmidlem2 4642*	Lemma for decidability and ordinals. The set { x e. { (/) } | ph } is a way of connecting statements about ordinals (such as trichotomy in ordtriexmid 4643 or weak linearity in ordsoexmid 4684) with a proposition ph. Our lemma helps connect that set to excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jan-2019.)
|- ( { x e. { (/) } | ph } = (/) -> -. ph )
Theorem	ordtriexmid 4643*	Ordinal trichotomy implies the law of the excluded middle (that is, decidability of an arbitrary proposition). This theorem is stated in "Constructive ordinals", [Crosilla], p. "Set-theoretic principles incompatible with intuitionistic logic". Also see exmidontri 7549 which is much the same theorem but biconditionalized and using the EXMID notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 14-Nov-2018.)
|- A. x e. On A. y e. On ( x e. y \/ x = y \/ y e. x )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	ontriexmidim 4644*	Ordinal trichotomy implies excluded middle. Closed form of ordtriexmid 4643. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 26-Aug-2024.)
|- ( A. x e. On A. y e. On ( x e. y \/ x = y \/ y e. x ) -> DECID ph )
Theorem	ordtri2orexmid 4645*	Ordinal trichotomy implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 31-Jul-2019.)
|- A. x e. On A. y e. On ( x e. y \/ y C_ x )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	2ordpr 4646	Version of 2on 6656 with the definition of 2o expanded and expressed in terms of Ord. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2021.)
|- Ord { (/) , { (/) } }
Theorem	ontr2exmid 4647*	An ordinal transitivity law which implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 17-Sep-2021.)
|- A. x e. On A. y A. z e. On ( ( x C_ y /\ y e. z ) -> x e. z )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	ordtri2or2exmidlem 4648*	A set which is 2o if ph or (/) if -. ph is an ordinal. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2021.)
|- { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ph } e. On
Theorem	onsucsssucexmid 4649*	The converse of onsucsssucr 4631 implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 29-Jul-2019.)
|- A. x e. On A. y e. On ( x C_ y -> suc x C_ suc y )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	onsucelsucexmidlem1 4650*	Lemma for onsucelsucexmid 4652. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.)
|- (/) e. { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) }
Theorem	onsucelsucexmidlem 4651*	Lemma for onsucelsucexmid 4652. The set { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) } appears as A in the proof of Theorem 1.3 in [Bauer] p. 483 (see acexmidlema 6041), and similar sets also appear in other proofs that various propositions imply excluded middle, for example in ordtriexmidlem 4641. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.)
|- { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) } e. On
Theorem	onsucelsucexmid 4652*	The converse of onsucelsucr 4630 implies excluded middle. On the other hand, if y is constrained to be a natural number, instead of an arbitrary ordinal, then the converse of onsucelsucr 4630 does hold, as seen at nnsucelsuc 6724. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.)
|- A. x e. On A. y e. On ( x e. y -> suc x e. suc y )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	ordsucunielexmid 4653*	The converse of sucunielr 4632 (where B is an ordinal) implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.)
|- A. x e. On A. y e. On ( x e. U. y -> suc x e. y )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
2.5  IZF Set Theory - add the Axiom of Set Induction
2.5.1  The ZF Axiom of Foundation would imply Excluded Middle
Theorem	regexmidlemm 4654*	Lemma for regexmid 4657. A is inhabited. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2019.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ( x = (/) /\ ph ) ) }   =>    |- E. y y e. A
Theorem	regexmidlem1 4655*	Lemma for regexmid 4657. If A has a minimal element, excluded middle follows. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2019.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ( x = (/) /\ ph ) ) }   =>    |- ( E. y ( y e. A /\ A. z ( z e. y -> -. z e. A ) ) -> ( ph \/ -. ph ) )
Theorem	reg2exmidlema 4656*	Lemma for reg2exmid 4658. If A has a minimal element (expressed by C_), excluded middle follows. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Oct-2021.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ( x = (/) /\ ph ) ) }   =>    |- ( E. u e. A A. v e. A u C_ v -> ( ph \/ -. ph ) )
Theorem	regexmid 4657*	The axiom of foundation implies excluded middle. By foundation (or regularity), we mean the principle that every inhabited set has an element which is minimal (when arranged by e.). The statement of foundation here is taken from Metamath Proof Explorer's ax-reg, and is identical (modulo one unnecessary quantifier) to the statement of foundation in Theorem "Foundation implies instances of EM" of [Crosilla], p. "Set-theoretic principles incompatible with intuitionistic logic". For this reason, IZF does not adopt foundation as an axiom and instead replaces it with ax-setind 4659. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2019.)
|- ( E. y y e. x -> E. y ( y e. x /\ A. z ( z e. y -> -. z e. x ) ) )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	reg2exmid 4658*	If any inhabited set has a minimal element (when expressed by C_), excluded middle follows. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Oct-2021.)
|- A. z ( E. w w e. z -> E. x e. z A. y e. z x C_ y )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
2.5.2  Introduce the Axiom of Set Induction
Axiom	ax-setind 4659*	Axiom of e.-Induction (also known as set induction). An axiom of Intuitionistic Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. Axiom 9 of [Crosilla] p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF". This replaces the Axiom of Foundation (also called Regularity) from Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. For more on axioms which might be adopted which are incompatible with this axiom (that is, Non-wellfounded Set Theory but in the absence of excluded middle), see Chapter 20 of [AczelRathjen], p. 183. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 19-Oct-2018.)
|- ( A. a ( A. y e. a [ y / a ] ph -> ph ) -> A. a ph )
Theorem	setindel 4660*	e.-Induction in terms of membership in a class. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 22-Oct-2018.)
|- ( A. x ( A. y ( y e. x -> y e. S ) -> x e. S ) -> S = _V )
Theorem	setind 4661*	Set (epsilon) induction. Theorem 5.22 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 21. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-2003.)
|- ( A. x ( x C_ A -> x e. A ) -> A = _V )
Theorem	setind2 4662	Set (epsilon) induction, stated compactly. Given as a homework problem in 1992 by George Boolos (1940-1996). (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-2003.)
|- ( ~P A C_ A -> A = _V )
Theorem	elirr 4663	No class is a member of itself. Exercise 6 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. The reason that this theorem is marked as discouraged is a bit subtle. If we wanted to reduce usage of ax-setind 4659, we could redefine Ord A (df-iord 4487) to also require _E Fr A (df-frind 4453) and in that case any theorem related to irreflexivity of ordinals could use ordirr 4664 (which under that definition would presumably not need ax-setind 4659 to prove it). But since ordinals have not yet been defined that way, we cannot rely on the "don't add additional axiom use" feature of the minimizer to get theorems to use ordirr 4664. To encourage ordirr 4664 when possible, we mark this theorem as discouraged. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Proof rewritten by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 26-Nov-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.)
|- -. A e. A
Theorem	ordirr 4664	Epsilon irreflexivity of ordinals: no ordinal class is a member of itself. Theorem 2.2(i) of [BellMachover] p. 469, generalized to classes. The present proof requires ax-setind 4659. If in the definition of ordinals df-iord 4487, we also required that membership be well-founded on any ordinal (see df-frind 4453), then we could prove ordirr 4664 without ax-setind 4659. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-1994.)
|- ( Ord A -> -. A e. A )
Theorem	onirri 4665	An ordinal number is not a member of itself. Theorem 7M(c) of [Enderton] p. 192. (Contributed by NM, 11-Jun-1994.)
|- A e. On   =>    |- -. A e. A
Theorem	nordeq 4666	A member of an ordinal class is not equal to it. (Contributed by NM, 25-May-1998.)
|- ( ( Ord A /\ B e. A ) -> A =/= B )
Theorem	ordn2lp 4667	An ordinal class cannot be an element of one of its members. Variant of first part of Theorem 2.2(vii) of [BellMachover] p. 469. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.)
|- ( Ord A -> -. ( A e. B /\ B e. A ) )
Theorem	orddisj 4668	An ordinal class and its singleton are disjoint. (Contributed by NM, 19-May-1998.)
|- ( Ord A -> ( A i^i { A } ) = (/) )
Theorem	orddif 4669	Ordinal derived from its successor. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-1998.)
|- ( Ord A -> A = ( suc A \ { A } ) )
Theorem	elirrv 4670	The membership relation is irreflexive: no set is a member of itself. Theorem 105 of [Suppes] p. 54. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.)
|- -. x e. x
Theorem	sucprcreg 4671	A class is equal to its successor iff it is a proper class (assuming the Axiom of Set Induction). (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2004.)
|- ( -. A e. _V <-> suc A = A )
Theorem	ruv 4672	The Russell class is equal to the universe _V. Exercise 5 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 4-Oct-2008.)
|- { x | x e/ x } = _V
Theorem	ruALT 4673	Alternate proof of Russell's Paradox ru 3041, simplified using (indirectly) the Axiom of Set Induction ax-setind 4659. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 4-Oct-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
|- { x | x e/ x } e/ _V
Theorem	onprc 4674	No set contains all ordinal numbers. Proposition 7.13 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 38. This is also known as the Burali-Forti paradox (remark in [Enderton] p. 194). In 1897, Cesare Burali-Forti noticed that since the "set" of all ordinal numbers is an ordinal class (ordon 4608), it must be both an element of the set of all ordinal numbers yet greater than every such element. ZF set theory resolves this paradox by not allowing the class of all ordinal numbers to be a set (so instead it is a proper class). Here we prove the denial of its existence. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-1994.)
|- -. On e. _V
Theorem	sucon 4675	The class of all ordinal numbers is its own successor. (Contributed by NM, 12-Sep-2003.)
|- suc On = On
Theorem	en2lp 4676	No class has 2-cycle membership loops. Theorem 7X(b) of [Enderton] p. 206. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.) (Proof rewritten by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 27-Nov-2018.)
|- -. ( A e. B /\ B e. A )
Theorem	preleq 4677	Equality of two unordered pairs when one member of each pair contains the other member. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- B e. _V   &    |- C e. _V   &    |- D e. _V   =>    |- ( ( ( A e. B /\ C e. D ) /\ { A , B } = { C , D } ) -> ( A = C /\ B = D ) )
Theorem	opthreg 4678	Theorem for alternate representation of ordered pairs, requiring the Axiom of Set Induction ax-setind 4659 (via the preleq 4677 step). See df-op 3698 for a description of other ordered pair representations. Exercise 34 of [Enderton] p. 207. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.)
|- A e. _V   &    |- B e. _V   &    |- C e. _V   &    |- D e. _V   =>    |- ( { A , { A , B } } = { C , { C , D } } <-> ( A = C /\ B = D ) )
Theorem	suc11g 4679	The successor operation behaves like a one-to-one function (assuming the Axiom of Set Induction). Similar to Exercise 35 of [Enderton] p. 208 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2003.)
|- ( ( A e. V /\ B e. W ) -> ( suc A = suc B <-> A = B ) )
Theorem	suc11 4680	The successor operation behaves like a one-to-one function. Compare Exercise 16 of [Enderton] p. 194. (Contributed by NM, 3-Sep-2003.)
|- ( ( A e. On /\ B e. On ) -> ( suc A = suc B <-> A = B ) )
Theorem	dtruex 4681*	At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). Although dtruarb 4304 can also be summarized as "at least two sets exist", the difference is that dtruarb 4304 shows the existence of two sets which are not equal to each other, but this theorem says that given a specific y, we can construct a set x which does not equal it. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2018.)
|- E. x -. x = y
Theorem	dtru 4682*	At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). If we assumed the law of the excluded middle this would be equivalent to dtruex 4681. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2018.)
|- -. A. x x = y
Theorem	eunex 4683	Existential uniqueness implies there is a value for which the wff argument is false. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2018.)
|- ( E! x ph -> E. x -. ph )
Theorem	ordsoexmid 4684	Weak linearity of ordinals implies the law of the excluded middle (that is, decidability of an arbitrary proposition). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 29-Jan-2019.)
|- _E Or On   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	ordsuc 4685	The successor of an ordinal class is ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1995.) (Constructive proof by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 20-Jul-2019.)
|- ( Ord A <-> Ord suc A )
Theorem	onsucuni2 4686	A successor ordinal is the successor of its union. (Contributed by NM, 10-Dec-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 27-Aug-2011.)
|- ( ( A e. On /\ A = suc B ) -> suc U. A = A )
Theorem	0elsucexmid 4687*	If the successor of any ordinal class contains the empty set, excluded middle follows. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2021.)
|- A. x e. On (/) e. suc x   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	nlimsucg 4688	A successor is not a limit ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 25-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 27-Aug-2011.)
|- ( A e. V -> -. Lim suc A )
Theorem	ordpwsucss 4689	The collection of ordinals in the power class of an ordinal is a superset of its successor. We can think of ( ~P A i^i On ) as another possible definition of successor, which would be equivalent to df-suc 4492 given excluded middle. It is an ordinal, and has some successor-like properties. For example, if A e. On then both U. suc A = A (onunisuci 4553) and U. { x e. On | x C_ A } = A (onuniss2 4634). Constructively ( ~P A i^i On ) and suc A cannot be shown to be equivalent (as proved at ordpwsucexmid 4692). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Jul-2019.)
|- ( Ord A -> suc A C_ ( ~P A i^i On ) )
Theorem	onnmin 4690	No member of a set of ordinal numbers belongs to its minimum. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-1997.) (Constructive proof by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 21-Jul-2019.)
|- ( ( A C_ On /\ B e. A ) -> -. B e. |^| A )
Theorem	ssnel 4691	Relationship between subset and elementhood. In the context of ordinals this can be seen as an ordering law. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Jul-2019.)
|- ( A C_ B -> -. B e. A )
Theorem	ordpwsucexmid 4692*	The subset in ordpwsucss 4689 cannot be equality. That is, strengthening it to equality implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Jul-2019.)
|- A. x e. On suc x = ( ~P x i^i On )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	ordtri2or2exmid 4693*	Ordinal trichotomy implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2021.)
|- A. x e. On A. y e. On ( x C_ y \/ y C_ x )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	ontri2orexmidim 4694*	Ordinal trichotomy implies excluded middle. Closed form of ordtri2or2exmid 4693. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 26-Aug-2024.)
|- ( A. x e. On A. y e. On ( x C_ y \/ y C_ x ) -> DECID ph )
Theorem	onintexmid 4695*	If the intersection (infimum) of an inhabited class of ordinal numbers belongs to the class, excluded middle follows. The hypothesis would be provable given excluded middle. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2021.)
|- ( ( y C_ On /\ E. x x e. y ) -> |^| y e. y )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	zfregfr 4696	The epsilon relation is well-founded on any class. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.)
|- _E Fr A
Theorem	ordfr 4697	Epsilon is well-founded on an ordinal class. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.)
|- ( Ord A -> _E Fr A )
Theorem	ordwe 4698	Epsilon well-orders every ordinal. Proposition 7.4 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 36. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.)
|- ( Ord A -> _E We A )
Theorem	wetriext 4699*	A trichotomous well-order is extensional. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 26-Sep-2021.)
|- ( ph -> R We A )   &    |- ( ph -> A e. V )   &    |- ( ph -> A. a e. A A. b e. A ( a R b \/ a = b \/ b R a ) )   &    |- ( ph -> B e. A )   &    |- ( ph -> C e. A )   &    |- ( ph -> A. z e. A ( z R B <-> z R C ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> B = C )
Theorem	wessep 4700	A subset of a set well-ordered by set membership is well-ordered by set membership. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Sep-2021.)
|- ( ( _E We A /\ B C_ A ) -> _E We B )