Theorem 1kp2ke3k 16618

Description: Example for df-dec 9728, 1000 + 2000 = 3000.

This proof disproves (by counterexample) the assertion of Hao Wang, who stated, "There is a theorem in the primitive notation of set theory that corresponds to the arithmetic theorem 1000 + 2000 = 3000. The formula would be forbiddingly long... even if (one) knows the definitions and is asked to simplify the long formula according to them, chances are he will make errors and arrive at some incorrect result." (Hao Wang, "Theory and practice in mathematics" , In Thomas Tymoczko, editor, New Directions in the Philosophy of Mathematics, pp 129-152, Birkauser Boston, Inc., Boston, 1986. (QA8.6.N48). The quote itself is on page 140.)

This is noted in Metamath: A Computer Language for Pure Mathematics by Norman Megill (2007) section 1.1.3. Megill then states, "A number of writers have conveyed the impression that the kind of absolute rigor provided by Metamath is an impossible dream, suggesting that a complete, formal verification of a typical theorem would take millions of steps in untold volumes of books... These writers assume, however, that in order to achieve the kind of complete formal verification they desire one must break down a proof into individual primitive steps that make direct reference to the axioms. This is not necessary. There is no reason not to make use of previously proved theorems rather than proving them over and over... A hierarchy of theorems and definitions permits an exponential growth in the formula sizes and primitive proof steps to be described with only a linear growth in the number of symbols used. Of course, this is how ordinary informal mathematics is normally done anyway, but with Metamath it can be done with absolute rigor and precision."

The proof here starts with (2 + 1) = 3, commutes it, and repeatedly multiplies both sides by ten. This is certainly longer than traditional mathematical proofs, e.g., there are a number of steps explicitly shown here to show that we're allowed to do operations such as multiplication. However, while longer, the proof is clearly a manageable size - even though every step is rigorously derived all the way back to the primitive notions of set theory and logic. And while there's a risk of making errors, the many independent verifiers make it much less likely that an incorrect result will be accepted.

This proof heavily relies on the decimal constructor df-dec 9728 developed by Mario Carneiro in 2015. The underlying Metamath language has an intentionally very small set of primitives; it doesn't even have a built-in construct for numbers. Instead, the digits are defined using these primitives, and the decimal constructor is used to make it easy to express larger numbers as combinations of digits.

(Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 29-Jun-2016.) (Shortened by Mario Carneiro using the arithmetic algorithm in mmj2, 30-Jun-2016.)

Assertion

Ref	Expression
1kp2ke3k	⊢ (;;;1000 + ;;;2000) = ;;;3000

Proof of Theorem 1kp2ke3k

Step	Hyp	Ref	Expression
1		1nn0 9529	. . . 4 ⊢ 1 ∈ ℕ0
2		0nn0 9528	. . . 4 ⊢ 0 ∈ ℕ0
3	1, 2	deccl 9741	. . 3 ⊢ ;10 ∈ ℕ0
4	3, 2	deccl 9741	. 2 ⊢ ;;100 ∈ ℕ0
5		2nn0 9530	. . . 4 ⊢ 2 ∈ ℕ0
6	5, 2	deccl 9741	. . 3 ⊢ ;20 ∈ ℕ0
7	6, 2	deccl 9741	. 2 ⊢ ;;200 ∈ ℕ0
8		eqid 2234	. 2 ⊢ ;;;1000 = ;;;1000
9		eqid 2234	. 2 ⊢ ;;;2000 = ;;;2000
10		eqid 2234	. . 3 ⊢ ;;100 = ;;100
11		eqid 2234	. . 3 ⊢ ;;200 = ;;200
12		eqid 2234	. . . 4 ⊢ ;10 = ;10
13		eqid 2234	. . . 4 ⊢ ;20 = ;20
14		1p2e3 9389	. . . 4 ⊢ (1 + 2) = 3
15		00id 8430	. . . 4 ⊢ (0 + 0) = 0
16	1, 2, 5, 2, 12, 13, 14, 15	decadd 9780	. . 3 ⊢ (;10 + ;20) = ;30
17	3, 2, 6, 2, 10, 11, 16, 15	decadd 9780	. 2 ⊢ (;;100 + ;;200) = ;;300
18	4, 2, 7, 2, 8, 9, 17, 15	decadd 9780	1 ⊢ (;;;1000 + ;;;2000) = ;;;3000

Syntax hints:   = wceq 1398  (class class class)co 6058  0cc0 8143  1c1 8144   + caddc 8146  2c2 9305  3c3 9306  ;cdc 9727

This theorem was proved from axioms:  ax-mp 5  ax-1 6  ax-2 7  ax-ia1 106  ax-ia2 107  ax-ia3 108  ax-in1 619  ax-in2 620  ax-io 717  ax-5 1496  ax-7 1497  ax-gen 1498  ax-ie1 1542  ax-ie2 1543  ax-8 1553  ax-10 1554  ax-11 1555  ax-i12 1556  ax-bndl 1558  ax-4 1559  ax-17 1575  ax-i9 1579  ax-ial 1583  ax-i5r 1584  ax-14 2208  ax-ext 2216  ax-sep 4233  ax-pow 4292  ax-pr 4327  ax-setind 4664  ax-cnex 8234  ax-resscn 8235  ax-1cn 8236  ax-1re 8237  ax-icn 8238  ax-addcl 8239  ax-addrcl 8240  ax-mulcl 8241  ax-addcom 8243  ax-mulcom 8244  ax-addass 8245  ax-mulass 8246  ax-distr 8247  ax-i2m1 8248  ax-1rid 8250  ax-0id 8251  ax-rnegex 8252  ax-cnre 8254

This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 117  df-3an 1007  df-tru 1401  df-fal 1404  df-nf 1510  df-sb 1812  df-eu 2085  df-mo 2086  df-clab 2221  df-cleq 2227  df-clel 2230  df-nfc 2375  df-ne 2415  df-ral 2527  df-rex 2528  df-reu 2529  df-rab 2531  df-v 2817  df-sbc 3046  df-dif 3216  df-un 3218  df-in 3220  df-ss 3227  df-pw 3676  df-sn 3700  df-pr 3701  df-op 3703  df-uni 3920  df-int 3955  df-br 4115  df-opab 4177  df-id 4419  df-xp 4760  df-rel 4761  df-cnv 4762  df-co 4763  df-dm 4764  df-iota 5317  df-fun 5359  df-fv 5365  df-riota 6011  df-ov 6061  df-oprab 6062  df-mpo 6063  df-sub 8462  df-inn 9255  df-2 9313  df-3 9314  df-4 9315  df-5 9316  df-6 9317  df-7 9318  df-8 9319  df-9 9320  df-n0 9514  df-dec 9728

This theorem is referenced by: (None)