| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 169 of 170) | < 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 | bj-unex 16801 | unex 4567 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | bdunexb 16802 | Bounded version of unexb 4568. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴 & ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ V ∧ 𝐵 ∈ V) ↔ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | bj-unexg 16803 | unexg 4569 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | bj-sucexg 16804 | sucexg 4625 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → suc 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | bj-sucex 16805 | sucex 4626 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ suc 𝐴 ∈ V | ||
| Axiom | ax-bj-d0cl 16806 | Axiom for Δ0-classical logic. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Jan-2020.) New usage is discouraged since this statement is not intuitionnistic. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ DECID 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | bj-d0clsepcl 16807 | Δ0-classical logic and separation implies classical logic. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Jan-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) New usage is discouraged since this statement is not intuitionnistic. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ DECID 𝜑 | ||
| Syntax | wind 16808 | Syntax for inductive classes. |
| wff Ind 𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-bj-ind 16809* | Define the property of being an inductive class. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ind 𝐴 ↔ (∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-indsuc 16810 | A direct consequence of the definition of Ind. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ind 𝐴 → (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 → suc 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-indeq 16811 | Equality property for Ind. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (Ind 𝐴 ↔ Ind 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-bdind 16812 | Boundedness of the formula "the setvar 𝑥 is an inductive class". (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED Ind 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | bj-indint 16813* | The property of being an inductive class is closed under intersections. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ind ∩ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ Ind 𝑥} | ||
| Theorem | bj-indind 16814* | If 𝐴 is inductive and 𝐵 is "inductive in 𝐴 " (a condition weaker than "inductive"), then (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) is inductive. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Oct-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((Ind 𝐴 ∧ (∅ ∈ 𝐵 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 → suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵))) → Ind (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-dfom 16815 | Alternate definition of ω, as the intersection of all the inductive sets. Proposal: make this the definition. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ ω = ∩ {𝑥 ∣ Ind 𝑥} | ||
| Theorem | bj-omind 16816 | ω is an inductive class. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ind ω | ||
| Theorem | bj-omssind 16817 | ω is included in all the inductive sets (but for the moment, we cannot prove that it is included in all the inductive classes). (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (Ind 𝐴 → ω ⊆ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-ssom 16818* | A characterization of subclasses of ω. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(Ind 𝑥 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝑥) ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ ω) | ||
| Theorem | bj-om 16819* | A set is equal to ω if and only if it is the smallest inductive set. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 = ω ↔ (Ind 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥(Ind 𝑥 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝑥)))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-2inf 16820* | Two formulations of the axiom of infinity (see ax-infvn 16823 and bj-omex 16824) . (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (ω ∈ V ↔ ∃𝑥(Ind 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦(Ind 𝑦 → 𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦))) | ||
The first three Peano postulates follow from constructive set theory (actually, from its core axioms). The proofs peano1 4721 and peano3 4723 already show this. In this section, we prove bj-peano2 16821 to complete this program. We also prove a preliminary version of the fifth Peano postulate from the core axioms. | ||
| Theorem | bj-peano2 16821 | Constructive proof of peano2 4722. Temporary note: another possibility is to simply replace sucexg 4625 with bj-sucexg 16804 in the proof of peano2 4722. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → suc 𝐴 ∈ ω) | ||
| Theorem | peano5set 16822* | Version of peano5 4725 when ω ∩ 𝐴 is assumed to be a set, allowing a proof from the core axioms of CZF. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((ω ∩ 𝐴) ∈ 𝑉 → ((∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ ω (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) → ω ⊆ 𝐴)) | ||
In the absence of full separation, the axiom of infinity has to be stated more precisely, as the existence of the smallest class containing the empty set and the successor of each of its elements. | ||
In this section, we introduce the axiom of infinity in a constructive setting (ax-infvn 16823) and deduce that the class ω of natural number ordinals is a set (bj-omex 16824). | ||
| Axiom | ax-infvn 16823* | Axiom of infinity in a constructive setting. This asserts the existence of the special set we want (the set of natural numbers), instead of the existence of a set with some properties (ax-iinf 4715) from which one then proves, using full separation, that the wanted set exists (omex 4720). "vn" is for "von Neumann". (Contributed by BJ, 14-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(Ind 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦(Ind 𝑦 → 𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-omex 16824 | Proof of omex 4720 from ax-infvn 16823. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ω ∈ V | ||
In this section, we give constructive proofs of two versions of Peano's fifth postulate. | ||
| Theorem | bdpeano5 16825* | Bounded version of peano5 4725. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ ((∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ ω (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) → ω ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | speano5 16826* | Version of peano5 4725 when 𝐴 is assumed to be a set, allowing a proof from the core axioms of CZF. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ ω (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) → ω ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
In this section, we prove various versions of bounded induction from the basic axioms of CZF (in particular, without the axiom of set induction). We also prove Peano's fourth postulate. Together with the results from the previous sections, this proves from the core axioms of CZF (with infinity) that the set of natural number ordinals satisfies the five Peano postulates and thus provides a model for the set of natural numbers. | ||
| Theorem | findset 16827* | Bounded induction (principle of induction when 𝐴 is assumed to be a set) allowing a proof from basic constructive axioms. See find 4726 for a nonconstructive proof of the general case. See bdfind 16828 for a proof when 𝐴 is assumed to be bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ((𝐴 ⊆ ω ∧ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐴 = ω)) | ||
| Theorem | bdfind 16828* | Bounded induction (principle of induction when 𝐴 is assumed to be bounded), proved from basic constructive axioms. See find 4726 for a nonconstructive proof of the general case. See findset 16827 for a proof when 𝐴 is assumed to be a set. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ ω ∧ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐴 = ω) | ||
| Theorem | bj-bdfindis 16829* | Bounded induction (principle of induction for bounded formulas), using implicit substitutions (the biconditional versions of the hypotheses are implicit substitutions, and we have weakened them to implications). Constructive proof (from CZF). See finds 4727 for a proof of full induction in IZF. From this version, it is easy to prove bounded versions of finds 4727, finds2 4728, finds1 4729. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜃 & ⊢ (𝑥 = ∅ → (𝜓 → 𝜑)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = suc 𝑦 → (𝜃 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ ω (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → ∀𝑥 ∈ ω 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-bdfindisg 16830* | Version of bj-bdfindis 16829 using a class term in the consequent. Constructive proof (from CZF). See the comment of bj-bdfindis 16829 for explanations. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜃 & ⊢ (𝑥 = ∅ → (𝜓 → 𝜑)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = suc 𝑦 → (𝜃 → 𝜑)) & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜏 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 → 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ ω (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → (𝐴 ∈ ω → 𝜏)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-bdfindes 16831 | Bounded induction (principle of induction for bounded formulas), using explicit substitutions. Constructive proof (from CZF). See the comment of bj-bdfindis 16829 for explanations. From this version, it is easy to prove the bounded version of findes 4730. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (([∅ / 𝑥]𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ ω (𝜑 → [suc 𝑥 / 𝑥]𝜑)) → ∀𝑥 ∈ ω 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nn0suc0 16832* | Constructive proof of a variant of nn0suc 4731. For a constructive proof of nn0suc 4731, see bj-nn0suc 16846. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐴 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐴 = suc 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nntrans 16833 | A natural number is a transitive set. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nntrans2 16834 | A natural number is a transitive set. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → Tr 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnelirr 16835 | A natural number does not belong to itself. Version of elirr 4668 for natural numbers, which does not require ax-setind 4664. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnen2lp 16836 |
A version of en2lp 4681 for natural numbers, which does not require
ax-setind 4664.
Note: using this theorem and bj-nnelirr 16835, one can remove dependency on ax-setind 4664 from nntri2 6740 and nndcel 6746; one can actually remove more dependencies from these. (Contributed by BJ, 28-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω) → ¬ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-peano4 16837 | Remove from peano4 4724 dependency on ax-setind 4664. Therefore, it only requires core constructive axioms (albeit more of them). (Contributed by BJ, 28-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω) → (suc 𝐴 = suc 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-omtrans 16838 |
The set ω is transitive. A natural number is
included in
ω. Constructive proof of elomssom 4732.
The idea is to use bounded induction with the formula 𝑥 ⊆ ω. This formula, in a logic with terms, is bounded. So in our logic without terms, we need to temporarily replace it with 𝑥 ⊆ 𝑎 and then deduce the original claim. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → 𝐴 ⊆ ω) | ||
| Theorem | bj-omtrans2 16839 | The set ω is transitive. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Tr ω | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnord 16840 | A natural number is an ordinal class. Constructive proof of nnord 4739. Can also be proved from bj-nnelon 16841 if the latter is proved from bj-omssonALT 16845. (Contributed by BJ, 27-Oct-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → Ord 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnelon 16841 | A natural number is an ordinal. Constructive proof of nnon 4737. Can also be proved from bj-omssonALT 16845. (Contributed by BJ, 27-Oct-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → 𝐴 ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | bj-omord 16842 | The set ω is an ordinal class. Constructive proof of ordom 4734. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ord ω | ||
| Theorem | bj-omelon 16843 | The set ω is an ordinal. Constructive proof of omelon 4736. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ω ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | bj-omsson 16844 | Constructive proof of omsson 4740. See also bj-omssonALT 16845. (Contributed by BJ, 27-Oct-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged. |
| ⊢ ω ⊆ On | ||
| Theorem | bj-omssonALT 16845 | Alternate proof of bj-omsson 16844. (Contributed by BJ, 27-Oct-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ω ⊆ On | ||
| Theorem | bj-nn0suc 16846* | Proof of (biconditional form of) nn0suc 4731 from the core axioms of CZF. See also bj-nn0sucALT 16860. As a characterization of the elements of ω, this could be labeled "elom". (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω ↔ (𝐴 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑥 ∈ ω 𝐴 = suc 𝑥)) | ||
In this section, we add the axiom of set induction to the core axioms of CZF. | ||
In this section, we prove some variants of the axiom of set induction. | ||
| Theorem | setindft 16847* | Axiom of set-induction with a disjoint variable condition replaced with a nonfreeness hypothesis. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥(∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | setindf 16848* | Axiom of set-induction with a disjoint variable condition replaced with a nonfreeness hypothesis. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | setindis 16849* | Axiom of set induction using implicit substitutions. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜒 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑦(∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 𝜓 → 𝜒) → ∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Axiom | ax-bdsetind 16850* | Axiom of bounded set induction. (Contributed by BJ, 28-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑎(∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑎 [𝑦 / 𝑎]𝜑 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑎𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bdsetindis 16851* | Axiom of bounded set induction using implicit substitutions. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜒 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑦(∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 𝜓 → 𝜒) → ∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-inf2vnlem1 16852* | Lemma for bj-inf2vn 16856. Remark: unoptimized proof (have to use more deduction style). (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = suc 𝑦)) → Ind 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | bj-inf2vnlem2 16853* | Lemma for bj-inf2vnlem3 16854 and bj-inf2vnlem4 16855. Remark: unoptimized proof (have to use more deduction style). (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = suc 𝑦) → (Ind 𝑍 → ∀𝑢(∀𝑡 ∈ 𝑢 (𝑡 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝑡 ∈ 𝑍) → (𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝑢 ∈ 𝑍)))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-inf2vnlem3 16854* | Lemma for bj-inf2vn 16856. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴 & ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑍 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = suc 𝑦) → (Ind 𝑍 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝑍)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-inf2vnlem4 16855* | Lemma for bj-inf2vn2 16857. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = suc 𝑦) → (Ind 𝑍 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝑍)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-inf2vn 16856* | A sufficient condition for ω to be a set. See bj-inf2vn2 16857 for the unbounded version from full set induction. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = suc 𝑦)) → 𝐴 = ω)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-inf2vn2 16857* | A sufficient condition for ω to be a set; unbounded version of bj-inf2vn 16856. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = suc 𝑦)) → 𝐴 = ω)) | ||
| Axiom | ax-inf2 16858* | Another axiom of infinity in a constructive setting (see ax-infvn 16823). (Contributed by BJ, 14-Nov-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑎∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ↔ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑎 𝑥 = suc 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-omex2 16859 | Using bounded set induction and the strong axiom of infinity, ω is a set, that is, we recover ax-infvn 16823 (see bj-2inf 16820 for the equivalence of the latter with bj-omex 16824). (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ω ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | bj-nn0sucALT 16860* | Alternate proof of bj-nn0suc 16846, also constructive but from ax-inf2 16858, hence requiring ax-bdsetind 16850. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω ↔ (𝐴 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑥 ∈ ω 𝐴 = suc 𝑥)) | ||
In this section, using the axiom of set induction, we prove full induction on the set of natural numbers. | ||
| Theorem | bj-findis 16861* | Principle of induction, using implicit substitutions (the biconditional versions of the hypotheses are implicit substitutions, and we have weakened them to implications). Constructive proof (from CZF). See bj-bdfindis 16829 for a bounded version not requiring ax-setind 4664. See finds 4727 for a proof in IZF. From this version, it is easy to prove of finds 4727, finds2 4728, finds1 4729. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜃 & ⊢ (𝑥 = ∅ → (𝜓 → 𝜑)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = suc 𝑦 → (𝜃 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ ω (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → ∀𝑥 ∈ ω 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-findisg 16862* | Version of bj-findis 16861 using a class term in the consequent. Constructive proof (from CZF). See the comment of bj-findis 16861 for explanations. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜃 & ⊢ (𝑥 = ∅ → (𝜓 → 𝜑)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = suc 𝑦 → (𝜃 → 𝜑)) & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜏 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 → 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ ω (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → (𝐴 ∈ ω → 𝜏)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-findes 16863 | Principle of induction, using explicit substitutions. Constructive proof (from CZF). See the comment of bj-findis 16861 for explanations. From this version, it is easy to prove findes 4730. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (([∅ / 𝑥]𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ ω (𝜑 → [suc 𝑥 / 𝑥]𝜑)) → ∀𝑥 ∈ ω 𝜑) | ||
In this section, we state the axiom scheme of strong collection, which is part of CZF set theory. | ||
| Axiom | ax-strcoll 16864* | Axiom scheme of strong collection. It is stated with all possible disjoint variable conditions, to show that this weak form is sufficient. The antecedent means that 𝜑 represents a multivalued function on 𝑎, or equivalently a collection of nonempty classes indexed by 𝑎, and the axiom asserts the existence of a set 𝑏 which "collects" at least one element in the image of each 𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 and which is made only of such elements. That second conjunct is what makes it "strong", compared to the axiom scheme of collection ax-coll 4230. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∀𝑎(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑏(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | strcoll2 16865* | Version of ax-strcoll 16864 with one disjoint variable condition removed and without initial universal quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑏(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | strcollnft 16866* | Closed form of strcollnf 16867. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦Ⅎ𝑏𝜑 → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑏(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | strcollnf 16867* |
Version of ax-strcoll 16864 with one disjoint variable condition
removed,
the other disjoint variable condition replaced with a nonfreeness
hypothesis, and without initial universal quantifier. Version of
strcoll2 16865 with the disjoint variable condition on
𝑏, 𝜑 replaced
with a nonfreeness hypothesis.
This proof aims to demonstrate a standard technique, but strcoll2 16865 will generally suffice: since the theorem asserts the existence of a set 𝑏, supposing that that setvar does not occur in the already defined 𝜑 is not a big constraint. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑏(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | strcollnfALT 16868* | Alternate proof of strcollnf 16867, not using strcollnft 16866. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑏(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 𝜑)) | ||
In this section, we state the axiom scheme of subset collection, which is part of CZF set theory. | ||
| Axiom | ax-sscoll 16869* | Axiom scheme of subset collection. It is stated with all possible disjoint variable conditions, to show that this weak form is sufficient. The antecedent means that 𝜑 represents a multivalued function from 𝑎 to 𝑏, or equivalently a collection of nonempty subsets of 𝑏 indexed by 𝑎, and the consequent asserts the existence of a subset of 𝑐 which "collects" at least one element in the image of each 𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 and which is made only of such elements. The axiom asserts the existence, for any sets 𝑎, 𝑏, of a set 𝑐 such that that implication holds for any value of the parameter 𝑧 of 𝜑. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∀𝑎∀𝑏∃𝑐∀𝑧(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑 → ∃𝑑 ∈ 𝑐 (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑑 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑑 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sscoll2 16870* | Version of ax-sscoll 16869 with two disjoint variable conditions removed and without initial universal quantifiers. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑐∀𝑧(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑 → ∃𝑑 ∈ 𝑐 (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑑 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑑 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 𝜑)) | ||
| Axiom | ax-ddkcomp 16871 | Axiom of Dedekind completeness for Dedekind real numbers: every inhabited upper-bounded located set of reals has a real upper bound. Ideally, this axiom should be "proved" as "axddkcomp" for the real numbers constructed from IZF, and then Axiom ax-ddkcomp 16871 should be used in place of construction specific results. In particular, axcaucvg 8231 should be proved from it. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Oct-2021.) |
| ⊢ (((𝐴 ⊆ ℝ ∧ ∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) ∧ ∃𝑥 ∈ ℝ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑦 < 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ ℝ ∀𝑦 ∈ ℝ (𝑥 < 𝑦 → (∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 < 𝑧 ∨ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 𝑧 < 𝑦))) → ∃𝑥 ∈ ℝ (∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑦 ≤ 𝑥 ∧ ((𝐵 ∈ 𝑅 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑦 ≤ 𝐵) → 𝑥 ≤ 𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | nnnotnotr 16872 | Double negation of double negation elimination. Suggested by an online post by Martin Escardo. Although this statement resembles nnexmid 858, it can be proved with reference only to implication and negation (that is, without use of disjunction). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ¬ (¬ ¬ 𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | ss1oel2o 16873 | Any subset of ordinal one being an element of ordinal two is equivalent to excluded middle. A variation of exmid01 4316 which more directly illustrates the contrast with el2oss1o 6689. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 8-Aug-2022.) |
| ⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ⊆ 1o → 𝑥 ∈ 2o)) | ||
| Theorem | 3dom 16874* | A set that dominates ordinal 3 has at least 3 different members. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 12-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (3o ≼ 𝐴 → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 ≠ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑥 ≠ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 ≠ 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | pw1ndom3lem 16875 | Lemma for pw1ndom3 16876. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 14-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝒫 1o) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝒫 1o) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑍 ∈ 𝒫 1o) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ≠ 𝑌) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ≠ 𝑍) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ≠ 𝑍) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 = ∅) | ||
| Theorem | pw1ndom3 16876 | The powerset of 1o does not dominate 3o. This is another way of saying that 𝒫 1o does not have three elements (like pwntru 4317). (Contributed by Steven Nguyen and Jim Kingdon, 14-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 3o ≼ 𝒫 1o | ||
| Theorem | pw1ninf 16877 | The powerset of 1o is not infinite. Since we cannot prove it is finite (see pw1fin 7183), this provides a concrete example of a set which we cannot show to be finite or infinite, as seen another way at inffiexmid 7179. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 14-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ω ≼ 𝒫 1o | ||
| Theorem | nnti 16878 | Ordering on a natural number generates a tight apartness. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Aug-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ ω) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑢 = 𝑣 ↔ (¬ 𝑢 E 𝑣 ∧ ¬ 𝑣 E 𝑢))) | ||
| Theorem | 012of 16879 | Mapping zero and one between ℕ0 and ω style integers. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jun-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = frec((𝑥 ∈ ℤ ↦ (𝑥 + 1)), 0) ⇒ ⊢ (◡𝐺 ↾ {0, 1}):{0, 1}⟶2o | ||
| Theorem | 2o01f 16880 | Mapping zero and one between ω and ℕ0 style integers. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jun-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = frec((𝑥 ∈ ℤ ↦ (𝑥 + 1)), 0) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐺 ↾ 2o):2o⟶{0, 1} | ||
| Theorem | pw1map 16881* | Mapping between (𝒫 1o ↑𝑚 𝐴) and subsets of 𝐴. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 9-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑠 ∈ (𝒫 1o ↑𝑚 𝐴) ↦ {𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ (𝑠‘𝑧) = 1o}) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝐹:(𝒫 1o ↑𝑚 𝐴)–1-1-onto→𝒫 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | pw1mapen 16882 | Equinumerosity of (𝒫 1o ↑𝑚 𝐴) and the set of subsets of 𝐴. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 10-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝒫 1o ↑𝑚 𝐴) ≈ 𝒫 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | pwtrufal 16883 | A subset of the singleton {∅} cannot be anything other than ∅ or {∅}. Removing the double negation would change the meaning, as seen at exmid01 4316. If we view a subset of a singleton as a truth value (as seen in theorems like exmidexmid 4314), then this theorem states there are no truth values other than true and false, as described in section 1.1 of [Bauer], p. 481. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 11-Sep-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ {∅} → ¬ ¬ (𝐴 = ∅ ∨ 𝐴 = {∅})) | ||
| Theorem | pwle2 16884* | An exercise related to 𝑁 copies of a singleton and the power set of a singleton (where the latter can also be thought of as representing truth values). Posed as an exercise by Martin Escardo online. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2023.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑁 ({𝑥} × 1o) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐺:𝑇–1-1→𝒫 1o) → 𝑁 ⊆ 2o) | ||
| Theorem | pwf1oexmid 16885* | An exercise related to 𝑁 copies of a singleton and the power set of a singleton (where the latter can also be thought of as representing truth values). Posed as an exercise by Martin Escardo online. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2023.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑁 ({𝑥} × 1o) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐺:𝑇–1-1→𝒫 1o) → (ran 𝐺 = 𝒫 1o ↔ (𝑁 = 2o ∧ EXMID))) | ||
| Theorem | subctctexmid 16886* | If every subcountable set is countable and Markov's principle holds, excluded middle follows. Proposition 2.6 of [BauerSwan], p. 14:4. The proof is taken from that paper. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Nov-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(∃𝑠(𝑠 ⊆ ω ∧ ∃𝑓 𝑓:𝑠–onto→𝑥) → ∃𝑔 𝑔:ω–onto→(𝑥 ⊔ 1o))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ω ∈ Markov) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → EXMID) | ||
| Theorem | domomsubct 16887* | A set dominated by ω is subcountable. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 11-Nov-2025.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ≼ ω → ∃𝑠(𝑠 ⊆ ω ∧ ∃𝑓 𝑓:𝑠–onto→𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | sssneq 16888* | Any two elements of a subset of a singleton are equal. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-May-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ {𝐵} → ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 𝑦 = 𝑧) | ||
| Theorem | pw1nct 16889* | A condition which ensures that the powerset of a singleton is not countable. The antecedent here can be referred to as the uniformity principle. Based on Mastodon posts by Andrej Bauer and Rahul Chhabra. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-May-2024.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑟(𝑟 ⊆ (𝒫 1o × ω) → (∀𝑝 ∈ 𝒫 1o∃𝑛 ∈ ω 𝑝𝑟𝑛 → ∃𝑚 ∈ ω ∀𝑞 ∈ 𝒫 1o𝑞𝑟𝑚)) → ¬ ∃𝑓 𝑓:ω–onto→(𝒫 1o ⊔ 1o)) | ||
| Theorem | pw1dceq 16890* | The powerset of 1o having decidable equality is equivalent to excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 12-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 1o∀𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 1oDECID 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | exmidnotnotr 16891 | Excluded middle is equivalent to double negation elimination. Read an element of 𝒫 1o as being a truth value and 𝑥 = 1o being that 𝑥 is true. For a similar theorem, but expressed in terms of formulas rather than subsets of 1o, see dcfromnotnotr 1493. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 1o(¬ ¬ 𝑥 = 1o → 𝑥 = 1o)) | ||
| Theorem | exmidcon 16892* | Excluded middle is equivalent to the form of contraposition which removes negation. Read an element of 𝒫 1o as being a truth value and 𝑥 = 1o being that 𝑥 is true. For a similar theorem, but expressed in terms of formulas rather than subsets of 1o, see dcfromcon 1494. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 1o∀𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 1o((¬ 𝑦 = 1o → ¬ 𝑥 = 1o) → (𝑥 = 1o → 𝑦 = 1o))) | ||
| Theorem | exmidpeirce 16893* | Excluded middle is equivalent to Peirce's law. Read an element of 𝒫 1o as being a truth value and 𝑥 = 1o being that 𝑥 is true. For a similar theorem, but expressed in terms of formulas rather than subsets of 1o, see dcfrompeirce 1495. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 1o∀𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 1o(((𝑥 = 1o → 𝑦 = 1o) → 𝑥 = 1o) → 𝑥 = 1o)) | ||
| Theorem | 0nninf 16894 | The zero element of ℕ∞ (the constant sequence equal to ∅). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 14-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ (ω × {∅}) ∈ ℕ∞ | ||
| Theorem | nnsf 16895* | Domain and range of 𝑆. Part of Definition 3.3 of [PradicBrown2022], p. 5. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑝 ∈ ℕ∞ ↦ (𝑖 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑖 = ∅, 1o, (𝑝‘∪ 𝑖)))) ⇒ ⊢ 𝑆:ℕ∞⟶ℕ∞ | ||
| Theorem | peano4nninf 16896* | The successor function on ℕ∞ is one to one. Half of Lemma 3.4 of [PradicBrown2022], p. 5. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 31-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑝 ∈ ℕ∞ ↦ (𝑖 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑖 = ∅, 1o, (𝑝‘∪ 𝑖)))) ⇒ ⊢ 𝑆:ℕ∞–1-1→ℕ∞ | ||
| Theorem | peano3nninf 16897* | The successor function on ℕ∞ is never zero. Half of Lemma 3.4 of [PradicBrown2022], p. 5. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Aug-2022.) |
| ⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑝 ∈ ℕ∞ ↦ (𝑖 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑖 = ∅, 1o, (𝑝‘∪ 𝑖)))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ℕ∞ → (𝑆‘𝐴) ≠ (𝑥 ∈ ω ↦ ∅)) | ||
| Theorem | nninfalllem1 16898* | Lemma for nninfall 16899. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Aug-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑄 ∈ (2o ↑𝑚 ℕ∞)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑄‘(𝑥 ∈ ω ↦ 1o)) = 1o) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑛 ∈ ω (𝑄‘(𝑖 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑖 ∈ 𝑛, 1o, ∅))) = 1o) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑃 ∈ ℕ∞) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑄‘𝑃) = ∅) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑛 ∈ ω (𝑃‘𝑛) = 1o) | ||
| Theorem | nninfall 16899* | Given a decidable predicate on ℕ∞, showing it holds for natural numbers and the point at infinity suffices to show it holds everywhere. The sense in which 𝑄 is a decidable predicate is that it assigns a value of either ∅ or 1o (which can be thought of as false and true) to every element of ℕ∞. Lemma 3.5 of [PradicBrown2022], p. 5. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Aug-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑄 ∈ (2o ↑𝑚 ℕ∞)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑄‘(𝑥 ∈ ω ↦ 1o)) = 1o) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑛 ∈ ω (𝑄‘(𝑖 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑖 ∈ 𝑛, 1o, ∅))) = 1o) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑝 ∈ ℕ∞ (𝑄‘𝑝) = 1o) | ||
| Theorem | nninfsellemdc 16900* | Lemma for nninfself 16903. Showing that the selection function is well defined. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 8-Aug-2022.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑄 ∈ (2o ↑𝑚 ℕ∞) ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → DECID ∀𝑘 ∈ suc 𝑁(𝑄‘(𝑖 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑖 ∈ 𝑘, 1o, ∅))) = 1o) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |