P. 18 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 1701-1800   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	19.23t 1701	Closed form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 7-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2018.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	19.23 1702	Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Sep-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	19.32dc 1703	Theorem 19.32 of [Margaris] p. 90, where 𝜑 is decidable. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 4-Jun-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (DECID 𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	19.32r 1704	One direction of Theorem 19.32 of [Margaris] p. 90. The converse holds if 𝜑 is decidable, as seen at 19.32dc 1703. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jul-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.31r 1705	One direction of Theorem 19.31 of [Margaris] p. 90. The converse holds in classical logic, but not intuitionistic logic. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jul-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.44 1706	Theorem 19.44 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.45 1707	Theorem 19.45 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.34 1708	Theorem 19.34 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑥𝜓) → ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.41h 1709	Theorem 19.41 of [Margaris] p. 90. New proofs should use 19.41 1710 instead. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.41 1710	Theorem 19.41 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Jan-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.42h 1711	Theorem 19.42 of [Margaris] p. 90. New proofs should use 19.42 1712 instead. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.42 1712	Theorem 19.42 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	excom13 1713	Swap 1st and 3rd existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑦∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	exrot3 1714	Rotate existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	exrot4 1715	Rotate existential quantifiers twice. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑤∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	nexr 1716	Inference from 19.8a 1614. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 26-Jul-2009.)
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ 𝜑
Theorem	exan 1717	Place a conjunct in the scope of an existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	hbexd 1718	Deduction form of bound-variable hypothesis builder hbex 1660. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑦𝜓 → ∀𝑥∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	eeor 1719	Rearrange existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 8-Aug-1994.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑦𝜓))
1.3.8  Equality theorems without distinct variables
Theorem	a9e 1720	At least one individual exists. This is not a theorem of free logic, which is sound in empty domains. For such a logic, we would add this theorem as an axiom of set theory (Axiom 0 of [Kunen] p. 10). In the system consisting of ax-5 1471 through ax-14 2180 and ax-17 1550, all axioms other than ax-9 1555 are believed to be theorems of free logic, although the system without ax-9 1555 is probably not complete in free logic. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	a9ev 1721*	At least one individual exists. Weaker version of a9e 1720. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-2017.)
⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	ax9o 1722	An implication related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → 𝜑)
Theorem	spimfv 1723*	Specialization, using implicit substitution. Version of spim 1762 with a disjoint variable condition. See spimv 1835 for another variant. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	chvarfv 1724*	Implicit substitution of 𝑦 for 𝑥 into a theorem. Version of chvar 1781 with a disjoint variable condition. (Contributed by Raph Levien, 9-Jul-2003.) (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜓
Theorem	equid 1725	Identity law for equality (reflexivity). Lemma 6 of [Tarski] p. 68. This is often an axiom of equality in textbook systems, but we don't need it as an axiom since it can be proved from our other axioms. This proof is similar to Tarski's and makes use of a dummy variable 𝑦. It also works in intuitionistic logic, unlike some other possible ways of proving this theorem. (Contributed by NM, 1-Apr-2005.)
⊢ 𝑥 = 𝑥
Theorem	nfequid 1726	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for 𝑥 = 𝑥. This theorem tells us that any variable, including 𝑥, is effectively not free in 𝑥 = 𝑥, even though 𝑥 is technically free according to the traditional definition of free variable. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jan-2011.) (Revised by NM, 21-Aug-2017.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦 𝑥 = 𝑥
Theorem	stdpc6 1727	One of the two equality axioms of standard predicate calculus, called reflexivity of equality. (The other one is stdpc7 1794.) Axiom 6 of [Mendelson] p. 95. Mendelson doesn't say why he prepended the redundant quantifier, but it was probably to be compatible with free logic (which is valid in the empty domain). (Contributed by NM, 16-Feb-2005.)
⊢ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥
Theorem	equcomi 1728	Commutative law for equality. Lemma 7 of [Tarski] p. 69. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑦 = 𝑥)
Theorem	ax6evr 1729*	A commuted form of a9ev 1721. The naming reflects how axioms were numbered in the Metamath Proof Explorer as of 2020 (a numbering which we eventually plan to adopt here too, but until this happens everywhere only some theorems will have it). (Contributed by BJ, 7-Dec-2020.)
⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑥
Theorem	equcom 1730	Commutative law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 20-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑥)
Theorem	equcomd 1731	Deduction form of equcom 1730, symmetry of equality. For the versions for classes, see eqcom 2208 and eqcomd 2212. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑦 = 𝑥)
Theorem	equcoms 1732	An inference commuting equality in antecedent. Used to eliminate the need for a syllogism. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑)
Theorem	equtr 1733	A transitive law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑦 = 𝑧 → 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	equtrr 1734	A transitive law for equality. Lemma L17 in [Megill] p. 446 (p. 14 of the preprint). (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑥 → 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	equtr2 1735	A transitive law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑧) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	equequ1 1736	An equivalence law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑧))
Theorem	equequ2 1737	An equivalence law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	ax11i 1738	Inference that has ax-11 1530 (without ∀𝑦) as its conclusion and does not require ax-10 1529, ax-11 1530, or ax12 1536 for its proof. The hypotheses may be eliminable without one or more of these axioms in special cases. Proof similar to Lemma 16 of [Tarski] p. 70. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-2008.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))
1.3.9  Axioms ax-10 and ax-11
Theorem	ax10o 1739	Show that ax-10o 1740 can be derived from ax-10 1529. An open problem is whether this theorem can be derived from ax-10 1529 and the others when ax-11 1530 is replaced with ax-11o 1847. See Theorem ax10 1741 for the rederivation of ax-10 1529 from ax10o 1739. Normally, ax10o 1739 should be used rather than ax-10o 1740, except by theorems specifically studying the latter's properties. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-2008.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))
Axiom	ax-10o 1740	Axiom ax-10o 1740 ("o" for "old") was the original version of ax-10 1529, before it was discovered (in May 2008) that the shorter ax-10 1529 could replace it. It appears as Axiom scheme C11' in [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of the preprint). This axiom is redundant, as shown by Theorem ax10o 1739. Normally, ax10o 1739 should be used rather than ax-10o 1740, except by theorems specifically studying the latter's properties. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	ax10 1741	Rederivation of ax-10 1529 from original version ax-10o 1740. See Theorem ax10o 1739 for the derivation of ax-10o 1740 from ax-10 1529. This theorem should not be referenced in any proof. Instead, use ax-10 1529 above so that uses of ax-10 1529 can be more easily identified. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥)
Theorem	hbae 1742	All variables are effectively bound in an identical variable specifier. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	nfae 1743	All variables are effectively bound in an identical variable specifier. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	hbaes 1744	Rule that applies hbae 1742 to antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
Theorem	hbnae 1745	All variables are effectively bound in a distinct variable specifier. Lemma L19 in [Megill] p. 446 (p. 14 of the preprint). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	nfnae 1746	All variables are effectively bound in a distinct variable specifier. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	hbnaes 1747	Rule that applies hbnae 1745 to antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
Theorem	naecoms 1748	A commutation rule for distinct variable specifiers. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑)
Theorem	equs4 1749	Lemma used in proofs of substitution properties. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 20-May-2014.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	equsalh 1750	A useful equivalence related to substitution. New proofs should use equsal 1751 instead. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	equsal 1751	A useful equivalence related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Feb-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	equsex 1752	A useful equivalence related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	equsexd 1753	Deduction form of equsex 1752. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	dral1 1754	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. Part of Theorem 9.4 of [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of preprint). (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-1994.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	dral2 1755	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. Part of Theorem 9.4 of [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of preprint). (Contributed by NM, 27-Feb-2005.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	drex2 1756	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. Part of Theorem 9.4 of [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of preprint). (Contributed by NM, 27-Feb-2005.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	drnf1 1757	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	drnf2 1758	Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	spimth 1759	Closed theorem form of spim 1762. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jan-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥((𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) ∧ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	spimt 1760	Closed theorem form of spim 1762. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jan-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 17-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Feb-2018.)
⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	spimh 1761	Specialization, using implicit substitition. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. The spim 1762 series of theorems requires that only one direction of the substitution hypothesis hold. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 8-May-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	spim 1762	Specialization, using implicit substitution. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. The spim 1762 series of theorems requires that only one direction of the substitution hypothesis hold. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 10-Jun-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	spimeh 1763	Existential introduction, using implicit substitition. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	spimed 1764	Deduction version of spime 1765. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Feb-2018.)
⊢ (𝜒 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	spime 1765	Existential introduction, using implicit substitution. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 6-Mar-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	cbv3 1766	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because proofs are encouraged to use the weaker cbv3v 1768 if possible. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-May-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbv3h 1767	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-May-2018.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbv3v 1768*	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Version of cbv3 1766 with a disjoint variable condition. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbv1 1769	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Revised to format hypotheses to common style. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 13-May-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbv1h 1770	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-May-2018.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbv1v 1771*	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbv2h 1772	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbv2 1773	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Revised to align format of hypotheses to common style. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 13-May-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbv2w 1774*	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Version of cbv2 1773 with a disjoint variable condition. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	cbvalv1 1775*	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Version of cbval 1778 with a disjoint variable condition. See cbvalvw 1944 for a version with two disjoint variable conditions, and cbvalv 1942 for another variant. (Contributed by NM, 13-May-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbvexv1 1776*	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Version of cbvex 1780 with a disjoint variable condition. See cbvexvw 1945 for a version with two disjoint variable conditions, and cbvexv 1943 for another variant. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbvalh 1777	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitition. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbval 1778	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbvexh 1779	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitition. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbvex 1780	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	chvar 1781	Implicit substitution of 𝑦 for 𝑥 into a theorem. (Contributed by Raph Levien, 9-Jul-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜓
Theorem	equvini 1782	A variable introduction law for equality. Lemma 15 of [Monk2] p. 109, however we do not require 𝑧 to be distinct from 𝑥 and 𝑦 (making the proof longer). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑧(𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	equveli 1783	A variable elimination law for equality with no distinct variable requirements. (Compare equvini 1782.) (Contributed by NM, 1-Mar-2013.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (∀𝑧(𝑧 = 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	nfald 1784	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑, it is not free in ∀𝑦𝜑. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Sep-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 6-Jan-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	nfexd 1785	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑, it is not free in ∃𝑦𝜑. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Sep-2016.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 7-Feb-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃𝑦𝜓)
1.3.10  Substitution (without distinct variables)
Syntax	wsb 1786	Extend wff definition to include proper substitution (read "the wff that results when 𝑦 is properly substituted for 𝑥 in wff 𝜑"). (Contributed by NM, 24-Jan-2006.)
wff [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Definition	df-sb 1787	Define proper substitution. Remark 9.1 in [Megill] p. 447 (p. 15 of the preprint). For our notation, we use [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 to mean "the wff that results when 𝑦 is properly substituted for 𝑥 in the wff 𝜑". We can also use [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 in place of the "free for" side condition used in traditional predicate calculus; see, for example, stdpc4 1799. Our notation was introduced in Haskell B. Curry's Foundations of Mathematical Logic (1977), p. 316 and is frequently used in textbooks of lambda calculus and combinatory logic. This notation improves the common but ambiguous notation, "𝜑(𝑦) is the wff that results when 𝑦 is properly substituted for 𝑥 in 𝜑(𝑥)". For example, if the original 𝜑(𝑥) is 𝑥 = 𝑦, then 𝜑(𝑦) is 𝑦 = 𝑦, from which we obtain that 𝜑(𝑥) is 𝑥 = 𝑥. So what exactly does 𝜑(𝑥) mean? Curry's notation solves this problem. In most books, proper substitution has a somewhat complicated recursive definition with multiple cases based on the occurrences of free and bound variables in the wff. Instead, we use a single formula that is exactly equivalent and gives us a direct definition. We later prove that our definition has the properties we expect of proper substitution (see Theorems sbequ 1864, sbcom2 2016 and sbid2v 2025). Note that our definition is valid even when 𝑥 and 𝑦 are replaced with the same variable, as sbid 1798 shows. We achieve this by having 𝑥 free in the first conjunct and bound in the second. We can also achieve this by using a dummy variable, as the alternate definition dfsb7 2020 shows (which some logicians may prefer because it doesn't mix free and bound variables). Another alternate definition which uses a dummy variable is dfsb7a 2023. When 𝑥 and 𝑦 are distinct, we can express proper substitution with the simpler expressions of sb5 1912 and sb6 1911. In classical logic, another possible definition is (𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ∨ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) but we do not have an intuitionistic proof that this is equivalent. There are no restrictions on any of the variables, including what variables may occur in wff 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ((𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∧ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	sbimi 1788	Infer substitution into antecedent and consequent of an implication. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jun-1998.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)
Theorem	sbbii 1789	Infer substitution into both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)
Theorem	sb1 1790	One direction of a simplified definition of substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	sb2 1791	One direction of a simplified definition of substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sbequ1 1792	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	sbequ2 1793	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜑))
Theorem	stdpc7 1794	One of the two equality axioms of standard predicate calculus, called substitutivity of equality. (The other one is stdpc6 1727.) Translated to traditional notation, it can be read: "𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑(𝑥, 𝑥) → 𝜑(𝑥, 𝑦)), provided that 𝑦 is free for 𝑥 in 𝜑(𝑥, 𝑦)". Axiom 7 of [Mendelson] p. 95. (Contributed by NM, 15-Feb-2005.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 → 𝜑))
Theorem	sbequ12 1795	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	sbequ12r 1796	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 6-Oct-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 21-Jun-2011.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	sbequ12a 1797	An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑))
Theorem	sbid 1798	An identity theorem for substitution. Remark 9.1 in [Megill] p. 447 (p. 15 of the preprint). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ([𝑥 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	stdpc4 1799	The specialization axiom of standard predicate calculus. It states that if a statement 𝜑 holds for all 𝑥, then it also holds for the specific case of 𝑦 (properly) substituted for 𝑥. Translated to traditional notation, it can be read: "∀𝑥𝜑(𝑥) → 𝜑(𝑦), provided that 𝑦 is free for 𝑥 in 𝜑(𝑥)". Axiom 4 of [Mendelson] p. 69. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sbh 1800	Substitution for a variable not free in a wff does not affect it. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 17-Oct-2004.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)