P. 60 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 5901-6000   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	riotaprop 5901*	Properties of a restricted definite description operator. Todo (df-riota 5877 update): can some uses of riota2f 5899 be shortened with this? (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2013.)
|- F/ x ps   &    |- B = ( iota_ x e. A ph )   &    |- ( x = B -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( E! x e. A ph -> ( B e. A /\ ps ) )
Theorem	riota5f 5902*	A method for computing restricted iota. (Contributed by NM, 16-Apr-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.)
|- ( ph -> F/_ x B )   &    |- ( ph -> B e. A )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ x e. A ) -> ( ps <-> x = B ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( iota_ x e. A ps ) = B )
Theorem	riota5 5903*	A method for computing restricted iota. (Contributed by NM, 20-Oct-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2016.)
|- ( ph -> B e. A )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ x e. A ) -> ( ps <-> x = B ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( iota_ x e. A ps ) = B )
Theorem	riotass2 5904*	Restriction of a unique element to a smaller class. (Contributed by NM, 21-Aug-2011.) (Revised by NM, 22-Mar-2013.)
|- ( ( ( A C_ B /\ A. x e. A ( ph -> ps ) ) /\ ( E. x e. A ph /\ E! x e. B ps ) ) -> ( iota_ x e. A ph ) = ( iota_ x e. B ps ) )
Theorem	riotass 5905*	Restriction of a unique element to a smaller class. (Contributed by NM, 19-Oct-2005.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.)
|- ( ( A C_ B /\ E. x e. A ph /\ E! x e. B ph ) -> ( iota_ x e. A ph ) = ( iota_ x e. B ph ) )
Theorem	moriotass 5906*	Restriction of a unique element to a smaller class. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-2006.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
|- ( ( A C_ B /\ E. x e. A ph /\ E* x e. B ph ) -> ( iota_ x e. A ph ) = ( iota_ x e. B ph ) )
Theorem	snriota 5907	A restricted class abstraction with a unique member can be expressed as a singleton. (Contributed by NM, 30-May-2006.)
|- ( E! x e. A ph -> { x e. A | ph } = { ( iota_ x e. A ph ) } )
Theorem	eusvobj2 5908*	Specify the same property in two ways when class B ( y ) is single-valued. (Contributed by NM, 1-Nov-2010.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.)
|- B e. _V   =>    |- ( E! x E. y e. A x = B -> ( E. y e. A x = B <-> A. y e. A x = B ) )
Theorem	eusvobj1 5909*	Specify the same object in two ways when class B ( y ) is single-valued. (Contributed by NM, 1-Nov-2010.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 19-Nov-2016.)
|- B e. _V   =>    |- ( E! x E. y e. A x = B -> ( iota x E. y e. A x = B ) = ( iota x A. y e. A x = B ) )
Theorem	f1ofveu 5910*	There is one domain element for each value of a one-to-one onto function. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-2006.)
|- ( ( F : A -1-1-onto-> B /\ C e. B ) -> E! x e. A ( F ` x ) = C )
Theorem	f1ocnvfv3 5911*	Value of the converse of a one-to-one onto function. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-2006.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.)
|- ( ( F : A -1-1-onto-> B /\ C e. B ) -> ( `' F ` C ) = ( iota_ x e. A ( F ` x ) = C ) )
Theorem	riotaund 5912*	Restricted iota equals the empty set when not meaningful. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2012.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) (Revised by NM, 13-Sep-2018.)
|- ( -. E! x e. A ph -> ( iota_ x e. A ph ) = (/) )
Theorem	acexmidlema 5913*	Lemma for acexmid 5921. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) }   &    |- B = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ph ) }   &    |- C = { A , B }   =>    |- ( { (/) } e. A -> ph )
Theorem	acexmidlemb 5914*	Lemma for acexmid 5921. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) }   &    |- B = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ph ) }   &    |- C = { A , B }   =>    |- ( (/) e. B -> ph )
Theorem	acexmidlemph 5915*	Lemma for acexmid 5921. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) }   &    |- B = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ph ) }   &    |- C = { A , B }   =>    |- ( ph -> A = B )
Theorem	acexmidlemab 5916*	Lemma for acexmid 5921. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) }   &    |- B = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ph ) }   &    |- C = { A , B }   =>    |- ( ( ( iota_ v e. A E. u e. y ( A e. u /\ v e. u ) ) = (/) /\ ( iota_ v e. B E. u e. y ( B e. u /\ v e. u ) ) = { (/) } ) -> -. ph )
Theorem	acexmidlemcase 5917*	Lemma for acexmid 5921. Here we divide the proof into cases (based on the disjunction implicit in an unordered pair, not the sort of case elimination which relies on excluded middle). The cases are (1) the choice function evaluated at A equals { (/) }, (2) the choice function evaluated at B equals (/), and (3) the choice function evaluated at A equals (/) and the choice function evaluated at B equals { (/) }. Because of the way we represent the choice function y, the choice function evaluated at A is ( iota_ v e. A E. u e. y ( A e. u /\ v e. u ) ) and the choice function evaluated at B is ( iota_ v e. B E. u e. y ( B e. u /\ v e. u ) ). Other than the difference in notation these work just as ( y ` A ) and ( y ` B ) would if y were a function as defined by df-fun 5260. Although it isn't exactly about the division into cases, it is also convenient for this lemma to also include the step that if the choice function evaluated at A equals { (/) }, then { (/) } e. A and likewise for B. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Aug-2019.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) }   &    |- B = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ph ) }   &    |- C = { A , B }   =>    |- ( A. z e. C E! v e. z E. u e. y ( z e. u /\ v e. u ) -> ( { (/) } e. A \/ (/) e. B \/ ( ( iota_ v e. A E. u e. y ( A e. u /\ v e. u ) ) = (/) /\ ( iota_ v e. B E. u e. y ( B e. u /\ v e. u ) ) = { (/) } ) ) )
Theorem	acexmidlem1 5918*	Lemma for acexmid 5921. List the cases identified in acexmidlemcase 5917 and hook them up to the lemmas which handle each case. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Aug-2019.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) }   &    |- B = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ph ) }   &    |- C = { A , B }   =>    |- ( A. z e. C E! v e. z E. u e. y ( z e. u /\ v e. u ) -> ( ph \/ -. ph ) )
Theorem	acexmidlem2 5919*	Lemma for acexmid 5921. This builds on acexmidlem1 5918 by noting that every element of C is inhabited. (Note that y is not quite a function in the df-fun 5260 sense because it uses ordered pairs as described in opthreg 4592 rather than df-op 3631). The set A is also found in onsucelsucexmidlem 4565. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-Aug-2019.)
|- A = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = (/) \/ ph ) }   &    |- B = { x e. { (/) , { (/) } } | ( x = { (/) } \/ ph ) }   &    |- C = { A , B }   =>    |- ( A. z e. C A. w e. z E! v e. z E. u e. y ( z e. u /\ v e. u ) -> ( ph \/ -. ph ) )
Theorem	acexmidlemv 5920*	Lemma for acexmid 5921. This is acexmid 5921 with additional disjoint variable conditions, most notably between ph and x. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
|- E. y A. z e. x A. w e. z E! v e. z E. u e. y ( z e. u /\ v e. u )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
Theorem	acexmid 5921*	The axiom of choice implies excluded middle. Theorem 1.3 in [Bauer] p. 483. The statement of the axiom of choice given here is ac2 in the Metamath Proof Explorer (version of 3-Aug-2019). In particular, note that the choice function y provides a value when z is inhabited (as opposed to nonempty as in some statements of the axiom of choice). Essentially the same proof can also be found at "The axiom of choice implies instances of EM", [Crosilla], p. "Set-theoretic principles incompatible with intuitionistic logic". Often referred to as Diaconescu's theorem, or Diaconescu-Goodman-Myhill theorem, after Radu Diaconescu who discovered it in 1975 in the framework of topos theory and N. D. Goodman and John Myhill in 1978 in the framework of set theory (although it already appeared as an exercise in Errett Bishop's book Foundations of Constructive Analysis from 1967). For this theorem stated using the df-ac 7273 and df-exmid 4228 syntaxes, see exmidac 7276. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 4-Aug-2019.)
|- E. y A. z e. x A. w e. z E! v e. z E. u e. y ( z e. u /\ v e. u )   =>    |- ( ph \/ -. ph )
2.6.11  Operations
Syntax	co 5922	Extend class notation to include the value of an operation F (such as + ) for two arguments A and B. Note that the syntax is simply three class symbols in a row surrounded by parentheses. Since operation values are the only possible class expressions consisting of three class expressions in a row surrounded by parentheses, the syntax is unambiguous.
class ( A F B )
Syntax	coprab 5923	Extend class notation to include class abstraction (class builder) of nested ordered pairs.
class { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph }
Syntax	cmpo 5924	Extend the definition of a class to include maps-to notation for defining an operation via a rule.
class ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C )
Definition	df-ov 5925	Define the value of an operation. Definition of operation value in [Enderton] p. 79. Note that the syntax is simply three class expressions in a row bracketed by parentheses. There are no restrictions of any kind on what those class expressions may be, although only certain kinds of class expressions - a binary operation F and its arguments A and B- will be useful for proving meaningful theorems. For example, if class F is the operation + and arguments A and B are 3 and 2 , the expression ( 3 + 2 ) can be proved to equal 5 . This definition is well-defined, although not very meaningful, when classes A and/or B are proper classes (i.e. are not sets); see ovprc1 5958 and ovprc2 5959. On the other hand, we often find uses for this definition when F is a proper class. F is normally equal to a class of nested ordered pairs of the form defined by df-oprab 5926. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
|- ( A F B ) = ( F ` <. A , B >. )
Definition	df-oprab 5926*	Define the class abstraction (class builder) of a collection of nested ordered pairs (for use in defining operations). This is a special case of Definition 4.16 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 14. Normally x, y, and z are distinct, although the definition doesn't strictly require it. See df-ov 5925 for the value of an operation. The brace notation is called "class abstraction" by Quine; it is also called a "class builder" in the literature. The value of the most common operation class builder is given by ovmpo 6058. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1995.)
|- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { w | E. x E. y E. z ( w = <. <. x , y >. , z >. /\ ph ) }
Definition	df-mpo 5927*	Define maps-to notation for defining an operation via a rule. Read as "the operation defined by the map from x , y (in A X. B) to B ( x , y )". An extension of df-mpt 4096 for two arguments. (Contributed by NM, 17-Feb-2008.)
|- ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C ) = { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ( ( x e. A /\ y e. B ) /\ z = C ) }
Theorem	oveq 5928	Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
|- ( F = G -> ( A F B ) = ( A G B ) )
Theorem	oveq1 5929	Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
|- ( A = B -> ( A F C ) = ( B F C ) )
Theorem	oveq2 5930	Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
|- ( A = B -> ( C F A ) = ( C F B ) )
Theorem	oveq12 5931	Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jul-1995.)
|- ( ( A = B /\ C = D ) -> ( A F C ) = ( B F D ) )
Theorem	oveq1i 5932	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
|- A = B   =>    |- ( A F C ) = ( B F C )
Theorem	oveq2i 5933	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
|- A = B   =>    |- ( C F A ) = ( C F B )
Theorem	oveq12i 5934	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.)
|- A = B   &    |- C = D   =>    |- ( A F C ) = ( B F D )
Theorem	oveqi 5935	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-2007.)
|- A = B   =>    |- ( C A D ) = ( C B D )
Theorem	oveq123i 5936	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by FL, 11-Jul-2010.)
|- A = C   &    |- B = D   &    |- F = G   =>    |- ( A F B ) = ( C G D )
Theorem	oveq1d 5937	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.)
|- ( ph -> A = B )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( A F C ) = ( B F C ) )
Theorem	oveq2d 5938	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.)
|- ( ph -> A = B )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( C F A ) = ( C F B ) )
Theorem	oveqd 5939	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-2006.)
|- ( ph -> A = B )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( C A D ) = ( C B D ) )
Theorem	oveq12d 5940	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.)
|- ( ph -> A = B )   &    |- ( ph -> C = D )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( A F C ) = ( B F D ) )
Theorem	oveqan12d 5941	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1995.)
|- ( ph -> A = B )   &    |- ( ps -> C = D )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> ( A F C ) = ( B F D ) )
Theorem	oveqan12rd 5942	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1995.)
|- ( ph -> A = B )   &    |- ( ps -> C = D )   =>    |- ( ( ps /\ ph ) -> ( A F C ) = ( B F D ) )
Theorem	oveq123d 5943	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by FL, 22-Dec-2008.)
|- ( ph -> F = G )   &    |- ( ph -> A = B )   &    |- ( ph -> C = D )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( A F C ) = ( B G D ) )
Theorem	fvoveq1d 5944	Equality deduction for nested function and operation value. (Contributed by AV, 23-Jul-2022.)
|- ( ph -> A = B )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( F ` ( A O C ) ) = ( F ` ( B O C ) ) )
Theorem	fvoveq1 5945	Equality theorem for nested function and operation value. Closed form of fvoveq1d 5944. (Contributed by AV, 23-Jul-2022.)
|- ( A = B -> ( F ` ( A O C ) ) = ( F ` ( B O C ) ) )
Theorem	ovanraleqv 5946*	Equality theorem for a conjunction with an operation values within a restricted universal quantification. Technical theorem to be used to reduce the size of a significant number of proofs. (Contributed by AV, 13-Aug-2022.)
|- ( B = X -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( B = X -> ( A. x e. V ( ph /\ ( A .x. B ) = C ) <-> A. x e. V ( ps /\ ( A .x. X ) = C ) ) )
Theorem	imbrov2fvoveq 5947	Equality theorem for nested function and operation value in an implication for a binary relation. Technical theorem to be used to reduce the size of a significant number of proofs. (Contributed by AV, 17-Aug-2022.)
|- ( X = Y -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- ( X = Y -> ( ( ph -> ( F ` ( ( G ` X ) .x. O ) ) R A ) <-> ( ps -> ( F ` ( ( G ` Y ) .x. O ) ) R A ) ) )
Theorem	ovrspc2v 5948*	If an operation value is element of a class for all operands of two classes, then the operation value is an element of the class for specific operands of the two classes. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2014.)
|- ( ( ( X e. A /\ Y e. B ) /\ A. x e. A A. y e. B ( x F y ) e. C ) -> ( X F Y ) e. C )
Theorem	oveqrspc2v 5949*	Restricted specialization of operands, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2014.)
|- ( ( ph /\ ( x e. A /\ y e. B ) ) -> ( x F y ) = ( x G y ) )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ( X e. A /\ Y e. B ) ) -> ( X F Y ) = ( X G Y ) )
Theorem	oveqdr 5950	Equality of two operations for any two operands. Useful in proofs using *propd theorems. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 29-Jun-2015.)
|- ( ph -> F = G )   =>    |- ( ( ph /\ ps ) -> ( x F y ) = ( x G y ) )
Theorem	nfovd 5951	Deduction version of bound-variable hypothesis builder nfov 5952. (Contributed by NM, 13-Dec-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.)
|- ( ph -> F/_ x A )   &    |- ( ph -> F/_ x F )   &    |- ( ph -> F/_ x B )   =>    |- ( ph -> F/_ x ( A F B ) )
Theorem	nfov 5952	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-2004.)
|- F/_ x A   &    |- F/_ x F   &    |- F/_ x B   =>    |- F/_ x ( A F B )
Theorem	oprabidlem 5953*	Slight elaboration of exdistrfor 1814. A lemma for oprabid 5954. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2019.)
|- ( E. x E. y ( x = z /\ ps ) -> E. x ( x = z /\ E. y ps ) )
Theorem	oprabid 5954	The law of concretion. Special case of Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. Although this theorem would be useful with a distinct variable condition between x, y, and z, we use ax-bndl 1523 to eliminate that constraint. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 20-Mar-2013.)
|- ( <. <. x , y >. , z >. e. { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } <-> ph )
Theorem	fnovex 5955	The result of an operation is a set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2019.)
|- ( ( F Fn ( C X. D ) /\ A e. C /\ B e. D ) -> ( A F B ) e. _V )
Theorem	ovexg 5956	Evaluating a set operation at two sets gives a set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 19-Aug-2021.)
|- ( ( A e. V /\ F e. W /\ B e. X ) -> ( A F B ) e. _V )
Theorem	ovprc 5957	The value of an operation when the one of the arguments is a proper class. Note: this theorem is dependent on our particular definitions of operation value, function value, and ordered pair. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2015.)
|- Rel dom F   =>    |- ( -. ( A e. _V /\ B e. _V ) -> ( A F B ) = (/) )
Theorem	ovprc1 5958	The value of an operation when the first argument is a proper class. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2004.)
|- Rel dom F   =>    |- ( -. A e. _V -> ( A F B ) = (/) )
Theorem	ovprc2 5959	The value of an operation when the second argument is a proper class. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2015.)
|- Rel dom F   =>    |- ( -. B e. _V -> ( A F B ) = (/) )
Theorem	csbov123g 5960	Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 5-Dec-2016.)
|- ( A e. D -> [_ A / x ]_ ( B F C ) = ( [_ A / x ]_ B [_ A / x ]_ F [_ A / x ]_ C ) )
Theorem	csbov12g 5961*	Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.)
|- ( A e. V -> [_ A / x ]_ ( B F C ) = ( [_ A / x ]_ B F [_ A / x ]_ C ) )
Theorem	csbov1g 5962*	Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.)
|- ( A e. V -> [_ A / x ]_ ( B F C ) = ( [_ A / x ]_ B F C ) )
Theorem	csbov2g 5963*	Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.)
|- ( A e. V -> [_ A / x ]_ ( B F C ) = ( B F [_ A / x ]_ C ) )
Theorem	rspceov 5964*	A frequently used special case of rspc2ev 2883 for operation values. (Contributed by NM, 21-Mar-2007.)
|- ( ( C e. A /\ D e. B /\ S = ( C F D ) ) -> E. x e. A E. y e. B S = ( x F y ) )
Theorem	fnotovb 5965	Equivalence of operation value and ordered triple membership, analogous to fnopfvb 5602. (Contributed by NM, 17-Dec-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.)
|- ( ( F Fn ( A X. B ) /\ C e. A /\ D e. B ) -> ( ( C F D ) = R <-> <. C , D , R >. e. F ) )
Theorem	opabbrex 5966*	A collection of ordered pairs with an extension of a binary relation is a set. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 1-Nov-2017.)
|- ( ( V e. _V /\ E e. _V ) -> ( f ( V W E ) p -> th ) )   &    |- ( ( V e. _V /\ E e. _V ) -> { <. f , p >. | th } e. _V )   =>    |- ( ( V e. _V /\ E e. _V ) -> { <. f , p >. | ( f ( V W E ) p /\ ps ) } e. _V )
Theorem	0neqopab 5967	The empty set is never an element in an ordered-pair class abstraction. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 5-Nov-2017.)
|- -. (/) e. { <. x , y >. | ph }
Theorem	brabvv 5968*	If two classes are in a relationship given by an ordered-pair class abstraction, the classes are sets. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 16-Jan-2019.)
|- ( X { <. x , y >. | ph } Y -> ( X e. _V /\ Y e. _V ) )
Theorem	dfoprab2 5969*	Class abstraction for operations in terms of class abstraction of ordered pairs. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1995.)
|- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { <. w , z >. | E. x E. y ( w = <. x , y >. /\ ph ) }
Theorem	reloprab 5970*	An operation class abstraction is a relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2004.)
|- Rel { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph }
Theorem	nfoprab1 5971	The abstraction variables in an operation class abstraction are not free. (Contributed by NM, 25-Apr-1995.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 19-Jun-2012.)
|- F/_ x { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph }
Theorem	nfoprab2 5972	The abstraction variables in an operation class abstraction are not free. (Contributed by NM, 25-Apr-1995.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 30-Jul-2012.)
|- F/_ y { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph }
Theorem	nfoprab3 5973	The abstraction variables in an operation class abstraction are not free. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-2013.)
|- F/_ z { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph }
Theorem	nfoprab 5974*	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for an operation class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-2013.)
|- F/ w ph   =>    |- F/_ w { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph }
Theorem	oprabbid 5975*	Equivalent wff's yield equal operation class abstractions (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.)
|- F/ x ph   &    |- F/ y ph   &    |- F/ z ph   &    |- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ps } = { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ch } )
Theorem	oprabbidv 5976*	Equivalent wff's yield equal operation class abstractions (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.)
|- ( ph -> ( ps <-> ch ) )   =>    |- ( ph -> { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ps } = { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ch } )
Theorem	oprabbii 5977*	Equivalent wff's yield equal operation class abstractions. (Contributed by NM, 28-May-1995.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 19-Jun-2012.)
|- ( ph <-> ps )   =>    |- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ps }
Theorem	ssoprab2 5978	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. Compare ssopab2 4310. (Contributed by FL, 6-Nov-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.)
|- ( A. x A. y A. z ( ph -> ps ) -> { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } C_ { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ps } )
Theorem	ssoprab2b 5979	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. Compare ssopab2b 4311. (Contributed by FL, 6-Nov-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.)
|- ( { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } C_ { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ps } <-> A. x A. y A. z ( ph -> ps ) )
Theorem	eqoprab2b 5980	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and biconditional. Compare eqopab2b 4314. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Jan-2017.)
|- ( { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ps } <-> A. x A. y A. z ( ph <-> ps ) )
Theorem	mpoeq123 5981*	An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Mar-2015.)
|- ( ( A = D /\ A. x e. A ( B = E /\ A. y e. B C = F ) ) -> ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C ) = ( x e. D , y e. E |-> F ) )
Theorem	mpoeq12 5982*	An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.)
|- ( ( A = C /\ B = D ) -> ( x e. A , y e. B |-> E ) = ( x e. C , y e. D |-> E ) )
Theorem	mpoeq123dva 5983*	An equality deduction for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jan-2017.)
|- ( ph -> A = D )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ x e. A ) -> B = E )   &    |- ( ( ph /\ ( x e. A /\ y e. B ) ) -> C = F )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C ) = ( x e. D , y e. E |-> F ) )
Theorem	mpoeq123dv 5984*	An equality deduction for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Sep-2011.)
|- ( ph -> A = D )   &    |- ( ph -> B = E )   &    |- ( ph -> C = F )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C ) = ( x e. D , y e. E |-> F ) )
Theorem	mpoeq123i 5985	An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jul-2013.)
|- A = D   &    |- B = E   &    |- C = F   =>    |- ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C ) = ( x e. D , y e. E |-> F )
Theorem	mpoeq3dva 5986*	Slightly more general equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 17-Oct-2013.)
|- ( ( ph /\ x e. A /\ y e. B ) -> C = D )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C ) = ( x e. A , y e. B |-> D ) )
Theorem	mpoeq3ia 5987	An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.)
|- ( ( x e. A /\ y e. B ) -> C = D )   =>    |- ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C ) = ( x e. A , y e. B |-> D )
Theorem	mpoeq3dv 5988*	An equality deduction for the maps-to notation restricted to the value of the operation. (Contributed by SO, 16-Jul-2018.)
|- ( ph -> C = D )   =>    |- ( ph -> ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C ) = ( x e. A , y e. B |-> D ) )
Theorem	nfmpo1 5989	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for an operation in maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Aug-2013.)
|- F/_ x ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C )
Theorem	nfmpo2 5990	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for an operation in maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Aug-2013.)
|- F/_ y ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C )
Theorem	nfmpo 5991*	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 20-Feb-2013.)
|- F/_ z A   &    |- F/_ z B   &    |- F/_ z C   =>    |- F/_ z ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C )
Theorem	mpo0 5992	A mapping operation with empty domain. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 29-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.)
|- ( x e. (/) , y e. B |-> C ) = (/)
Theorem	oprab4 5993*	Two ways to state the domain of an operation. (Contributed by FL, 24-Jan-2010.)
|- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ( <. x , y >. e. ( A X. B ) /\ ph ) } = { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ( ( x e. A /\ y e. B ) /\ ph ) }
Theorem	cbvoprab1 5994*	Rule used to change first bound variable in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 20-Dec-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 5-Dec-2016.)
|- F/ w ph   &    |- F/ x ps   &    |- ( x = w -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { <. <. w , y >. , z >. | ps }
Theorem	cbvoprab2 5995*	Change the second bound variable in an operation abstraction. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 11-Jun-2010.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.)
|- F/ w ph   &    |- F/ y ps   &    |- ( y = w -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { <. <. x , w >. , z >. | ps }
Theorem	cbvoprab12 5996*	Rule used to change first two bound variables in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.)
|- F/ w ph   &    |- F/ v ph   &    |- F/ x ps   &    |- F/ y ps   &    |- ( ( x = w /\ y = v ) -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { <. <. w , v >. , z >. | ps }
Theorem	cbvoprab12v 5997*	Rule used to change first two bound variables in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 8-Oct-2004.)
|- ( ( x = w /\ y = v ) -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { <. <. w , v >. , z >. | ps }
Theorem	cbvoprab3 5998*	Rule used to change the third bound variable in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-2013.)
|- F/ w ph   &    |- F/ z ps   &    |- ( z = w -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { <. <. x , y >. , w >. | ps }
Theorem	cbvoprab3v 5999*	Rule used to change the third bound variable in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 8-Oct-2004.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 19-Jun-2012.)
|- ( z = w -> ( ph <-> ps ) )   =>    |- { <. <. x , y >. , z >. | ph } = { <. <. x , y >. , w >. | ps }
Theorem	cbvmpox 6000*	Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. This version of cbvmpo 6001 allows B to be a function of x. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-2014.)
|- F/_ z B   &    |- F/_ x D   &    |- F/_ z C   &    |- F/_ w C   &    |- F/_ x E   &    |- F/_ y E   &    |- ( x = z -> B = D )   &    |- ( ( x = z /\ y = w ) -> C = E )   =>    |- ( x e. A , y e. B |-> C ) = ( z e. A , w e. D |-> E )