| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 14 of 168) | < Previous Next > | |
| Bad symbols? Try the
GIF version. |
||
|
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > ILE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
||
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | syl322anc 1301 | Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by NM, 11-Mar-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜂) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜁) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜎) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ (𝜏 ∧ 𝜂) ∧ (𝜁 ∧ 𝜎)) → 𝜌) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜌) | ||
| Theorem | syl233anc 1302 | Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by NM, 11-Mar-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜂) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜁) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜎) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜌) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏 ∧ 𝜂) ∧ (𝜁 ∧ 𝜎 ∧ 𝜌)) → 𝜇) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜇) | ||
| Theorem | syl323anc 1303 | Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by NM, 11-Mar-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜂) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜁) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜎) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜌) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ (𝜏 ∧ 𝜂) ∧ (𝜁 ∧ 𝜎 ∧ 𝜌)) → 𝜇) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜇) | ||
| Theorem | syl332anc 1304 | Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by NM, 11-Mar-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜂) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜁) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜎) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜌) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ (𝜏 ∧ 𝜂 ∧ 𝜁) ∧ (𝜎 ∧ 𝜌)) → 𝜇) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜇) | ||
| Theorem | syl333anc 1305 | A syllogism inference combined with contraction. (Contributed by NM, 10-Mar-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜂) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜁) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜎) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜌) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜇) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ (𝜏 ∧ 𝜂 ∧ 𝜁) ∧ (𝜎 ∧ 𝜌 ∧ 𝜇)) → 𝜆) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜆) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an1 1306 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an2 1307 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an3 1308 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an1b 1309 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an2b 1310 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an3b 1311 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an1br 1312 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an2br 1313 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an3br 1314 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an 1315 | A triple syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 13-May-2004.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜏 → 𝜂) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂) → 𝜁) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜁) | ||
| Theorem | syl3anb 1316 | A triple syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 15-Oct-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜂) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂) → 𝜁) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜁) | ||
| Theorem | syl3anbr 1317 | A triple syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜏) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂) → 𝜁) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜁) | ||
| Theorem | syld3an3 1318 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-2007.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syld3an1 1319 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 7-Jul-2008.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜑) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syld3an2 1320 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-2007.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | syl3anl1 1321 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | syl3anl2 1322 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | syl3anl3 1323 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜑) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | syl3anl 1324 | A triple syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 24-Dec-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜏 → 𝜂) & ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂) ∧ 𝜁) → 𝜎) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏) ∧ 𝜁) → 𝜎) | ||
| Theorem | syl3anr1 1325 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-2007.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | syl3anr2 1326 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-2007.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜏)) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | syl3anr3 1327 | A syllogism inference. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-2007.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜑)) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | syldbl2 1328 | Stacked hypotheseis implies goal. (Contributed by Stanislas Polu, 9-Mar-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | 3impdi 1329 | Importation inference (undistribute conjunction). (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | 3impdir 1330 | Importation inference (undistribute conjunction). (Contributed by NM, 20-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜓)) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | 3anidm12 1331 | Inference from idempotent law for conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 7-Mar-2008.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | 3anidm13 1332 | Inference from idempotent law for conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 7-Mar-2008.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | 3anidm23 1333 | Inference from idempotent law for conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 1-Feb-2007.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | syl2an3an 1334 | syl3an 1315 with antecedents in standard conjunction form. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 31-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | syl2an23an 1335 | Deduction related to syl3an 1315 with antecedents in standard conjunction form. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 31-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜃 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜃 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | 3ori 1336 | Infer implication from triple disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 26-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | 3jao 1337 | Disjunction of 3 antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 8-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 → 𝜓)) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜃) → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 3jaob 1338 | Disjunction of 3 antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 13-Sep-2011.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜃) → 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | 3jaoi 1339 | Disjunction of 3 antecedents (inference). (Contributed by NM, 12-Sep-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜃) → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | 3jaod 1340 | Disjunction of 3 antecedents (deduction). (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃 ∨ 𝜏) → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 3jaoian 1341 | Disjunction of 3 antecedents (inference). (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜃 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜏 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜃 ∨ 𝜏) ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | 3jaodan 1342 | Disjunction of 3 antecedents (deduction). (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃 ∨ 𝜏)) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | mpjao3dan 1343 | Eliminate a 3-way disjunction in a deduction. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 13-Apr-2018.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃 ∨ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | 3jaao 1344 | Inference conjoining and disjoining the antecedents of three implications. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 15-Aug-2009.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜃 → (𝜏 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜂 → (𝜁 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂) → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜏 ∨ 𝜁) → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 3ianorr 1345 | Triple disjunction implies negated triple conjunction. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Dec-2018.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒) → ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | syl3an9b 1346 | Nested syllogism inference conjoining 3 dissimilar antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 1-May-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜃 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜂 → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜁)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜁)) | ||
| Theorem | 3orbi123d 1347 | Deduction joining 3 equivalences to form equivalence of disjunctions. (Contributed by NM, 20-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃 ∨ 𝜂) ↔ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜏 ∨ 𝜁))) | ||
| Theorem | 3anbi123d 1348 | Deduction joining 3 equivalences to form equivalence of conjunctions. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂) ↔ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜏 ∧ 𝜁))) | ||
| Theorem | 3anbi12d 1349 | Deduction conjoining and adding a conjunct to equivalences. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂) ↔ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜏 ∧ 𝜂))) | ||
| Theorem | 3anbi13d 1350 | Deduction conjoining and adding a conjunct to equivalences. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜂 ∧ 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜂 ∧ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | 3anbi23d 1351 | Deduction conjoining and adding a conjunct to equivalences. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜂 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) ↔ (𝜂 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | 3anbi1d 1352 | Deduction adding conjuncts to an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜏) ↔ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | 3anbi2d 1353 | Deduction adding conjuncts to an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜃 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜏) ↔ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | 3anbi3d 1354 | Deduction adding conjuncts to an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 8-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜃 ∧ 𝜏 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | 3anim123d 1355 | Deduction joining 3 implications to form implication of conjunctions. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜂 → 𝜁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂) → (𝜒 ∧ 𝜏 ∧ 𝜁))) | ||
| Theorem | 3orim123d 1356 | Deduction joining 3 implications to form implication of disjunctions. (Contributed by NM, 4-Apr-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜂 → 𝜁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃 ∨ 𝜂) → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜏 ∨ 𝜁))) | ||
| Theorem | an6 1357 | Rearrangement of 6 conjuncts. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏 ∧ 𝜂)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜏) ∧ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜂))) | ||
| Theorem | 3an6 1358 | Analog of an4 588 for triple conjunction. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ (𝜏 ∧ 𝜂)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏) ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜂))) | ||
| Theorem | 3or6 1359 | Analog of or4 778 for triple conjunction. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2011.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃) ∨ (𝜏 ∨ 𝜂)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜏) ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃 ∨ 𝜂))) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an1 1360 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 21-Nov-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an2 1361 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 21-Nov-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an3 1362 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 21-Nov-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝜒 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an12 1363 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jul-2005.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an13 1364 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 14-Jul-2005.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ 𝜒 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an23 1365 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 14-Jul-2005.) |
| ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ 𝜒 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an1i 1366 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jul-2005.) |
| ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏)) | ||
| Theorem | mp3anl1 1367 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | mp3anl2 1368 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | mp3anl3 1369 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ 𝜒 & ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | mp3anr1 1370 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2006.) |
| ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | mp3anr2 1371 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-2006.) |
| ⊢ 𝜒 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | mp3anr3 1372 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 19-Oct-2007.) |
| ⊢ 𝜃 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an 1373 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1999.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ 𝜒 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜃 | ||
| Theorem | mpd3an3 1374 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 8-Nov-2007.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | mpd3an23 1375 | An inference based on modus ponens. (Contributed by NM, 4-Dec-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | mp3and 1376 | A deduction based on modus ponens. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an12i 1377 | mp3an 1373 with antecedents in standard conjunction form and with one hypothesis an implication. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an2i 1378 | mp3an 1373 with antecedents in standard conjunction form and with two hypotheses which are implications. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an3an 1379 | mp3an 1373 with antecedents in standard conjunction form and with two hypotheses which are implications. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | mp3an2ani 1380 | An elimination deduction. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 17-Oct-2017.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜂) | ||
| Theorem | biimp3a 1381 | Infer implication from a logical equivalence. Similar to biimpa 296. (Contributed by NM, 4-Sep-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | biimp3ar 1382 | Infer implication from a logical equivalence. Similar to biimpar 297. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2009.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | 3anandis 1383 | Inference that undistributes a triple conjunction in the antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 18-Apr-2007.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | 3anandirs 1384 | Inference that undistributes a triple conjunction in the antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jul-2006.) (Revised by NM, 18-Apr-2007.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃) ∧ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | ecased 1385 | Deduction form of disjunctive syllogism. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 9-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | ecase23d 1386 | Variation of ecased 1385 with three disjuncts instead of two. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.) (Revised by Jim Kingdon, 9-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | ecase2d 1387 | Deduction for elimination by cases. (Contributed by NM, 21-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Sep-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ∨ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | 3bior1fd 1388 | A disjunction is equivalent to a threefold disjunction with single falsehood, analogous to biorf 751. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 8-Sep-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜒 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜃 ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | 3bior1fand 1389 | A disjunction is equivalent to a threefold disjunction with single falsehood of a conjunction. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 8-Sep-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜒 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜃 ∧ 𝜏) ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | 3bior2fd 1390 | A wff is equivalent to its threefold disjunction with double falsehood, analogous to biorf 751. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 8-Sep-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ (𝜃 ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | 3biant1d 1391 | A conjunction is equivalent to a threefold conjunction with single truth, analogous to biantrud 304. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 26-Sep-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | intn3an1d 1392 | Introduction of a triple conjunct inside a contradiction. (Contributed by FL, 27-Dec-2007.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 26-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | intn3an2d 1393 | Introduction of a triple conjunct inside a contradiction. (Contributed by FL, 27-Dec-2007.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 26-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | intn3an3d 1394 | Introduction of a triple conjunct inside a contradiction. (Contributed by FL, 27-Dec-2007.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 26-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
Even though it is not ordinarily part of propositional calculus, the universal quantifier ∀ is introduced here so that the soundness of Definition df-tru 1400 can be checked by the same algorithm that is used for predicate calculus. Its first real use is in Axiom ax-5 1495 in the predicate calculus section below. For those who want propositional calculus to be self-contained, i.e., to use wff variables only, the alternate Definition dftru2 1405 may be adopted and this subsection moved down to the start of the subsection with wex 1540 below. However, the use of dftru2 1405 as a definition requires a more elaborate definition checking algorithm that we prefer to avoid. | ||
| Syntax | wal 1395 | Extend wff definition to include the universal quantifier ("for all"). ∀𝑥𝜑 is read "𝜑 (phi) is true for all 𝑥". Typically, in its final application 𝜑 would be replaced with a wff containing a (free) occurrence of the variable 𝑥, for example 𝑥 = 𝑦. In a universe with a finite number of objects, "for all" is equivalent to a big conjunction (AND) with one wff for each possible case of 𝑥. When the universe is infinite (as with set theory), such a propositional-calculus equivalent is not possible because an infinitely long formula has no meaning, but conceptually the idea is the same. |
| wff ∀𝑥𝜑 | ||
Even though it is not ordinarily part of propositional calculus, the equality predicate = is introduced here so that the soundness of definition df-tru 1400 can be checked by the same algorithm as is used for predicate calculus. Its first real use is in Axiom ax-8 1552 in the predicate calculus section below. For those who want propositional calculus to be self-contained, i.e., to use wff variables only, the alternate definition dftru2 1405 may be adopted and this subsection moved down to just above weq 1551 below. However, the use of dftru2 1405 as a definition requires a more elaborate definition checking algorithm that we prefer to avoid. | ||
| Syntax | cv 1396 |
This syntax construction states that a variable 𝑥, which has been
declared to be a setvar variable by $f statement vx, is also a class
expression. This can be justified informally as follows. We know that
the class builder {𝑦 ∣ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥} is a class by cab 2217.
Since (when
𝑦 is distinct from 𝑥) we
have 𝑥 =
{𝑦 ∣ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥} by
cvjust 2226, we can argue that the syntax "class 𝑥 " can be viewed as
an abbreviation for "class {𝑦 ∣ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥}". See the discussion
under the definition of class in [Jech] p.
4 showing that "Every set can
be considered to be a class."
While it is tempting and perhaps occasionally useful to view cv 1396 as a "type conversion" from a setvar variable to a class variable, keep in mind that cv 1396 is intrinsically no different from any other class-building syntax such as cab 2217, cun 3198, or c0 3494. For a general discussion of the theory of classes and the role of cv 1396, see https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmset.html#class 1396. (The description above applies to set theory, not predicate calculus. The purpose of introducing class 𝑥 here, and not in set theory where it belongs, is to allow us to express i.e. "prove" the weq 1551 of predicate calculus from the wceq 1397 of set theory, so that we don't overload the = connective with two syntax definitions. This is done to prevent ambiguity that would complicate some Metamath parsers.) |
| class 𝑥 | ||
| Syntax | wceq 1397 |
Extend wff definition to include class equality.
For a general discussion of the theory of classes, see https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmset.html#class. (The purpose of introducing wff 𝐴 = 𝐵 here, and not in set theory where it belongs, is to allow us to express i.e. "prove" the weq 1551 of predicate calculus in terms of the wceq 1397 of set theory, so that we don't "overload" the = connective with two syntax definitions. This is done to prevent ambiguity that would complicate some Metamath parsers. For example, some parsers - although not the Metamath program - stumble on the fact that the = in 𝑥 = 𝑦 could be the = of either weq 1551 or wceq 1397, although mathematically it makes no difference. The class variables 𝐴 and 𝐵 are introduced temporarily for the purpose of this definition but otherwise not used in predicate calculus. See df-cleq 2224 for more information on the set theory usage of wceq 1397.) |
| wff 𝐴 = 𝐵 | ||
| Syntax | wtru 1398 | ⊤ is a wff. |
| wff ⊤ | ||
| Theorem | trujust 1399 | Soundness justification theorem for df-tru 1400. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2013.) (Revised by NM, 11-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥 → ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥) ↔ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Definition | df-tru 1400 | Definition of the truth value "true", or "verum", denoted by ⊤. This is a tautology, as proved by tru 1401. In this definition, an instance of id 19 is used as the definiens, although any tautology, such as an axiom, can be used in its place. This particular id 19 instance was chosen so this definition can be checked by the same algorithm that is used for predicate calculus. This definition should be referenced directly only by tru 1401, and other proofs should depend on tru 1401 (directly or indirectly) instead of this definition, since there are many alternate ways to define ⊤. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 13-Oct-2010.) (Revised by NM, 11-Jul-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (⊤ ↔ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥 → ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥)) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |