| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 18 of 158)  | < 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 | 19.42h 1701 | Theorem 19.42 of [Margaris] p. 90. New proofs should use 19.42 1702 instead. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.42 1702 | Theorem 19.42 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | excom13 1703 | Swap 1st and 3rd existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) | 
| ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑦∃𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | exrot3 1704 | Rotate existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-1995.) | 
| ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | exrot4 1705 | Rotate existential quantifiers twice. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) | 
| ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑤∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | nexr 1706 | Inference from 19.8a 1604. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 26-Jul-2009.) | 
| ⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | exan 1707 | 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 1708 | Deduction form of bound-variable hypothesis builder hbex 1650. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑦𝜓 → ∀𝑥∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | eeor 1709 | Rearrange existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 8-Aug-1994.) | 
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | a9e 1710 | 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 1461 through ax-14 2170 and ax-17 1540, all axioms other than ax-9 1545 are believed to be theorems of free logic, although the system without ax-9 1545 is probably not complete in free logic. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.) | 
| ⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | a9ev 1711* | At least one individual exists. Weaker version of a9e 1710. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-2017.) | 
| ⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | ax9o 1712 | An implication related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | spimfv 1713* | Specialization, using implicit substitution. Version of spim 1752 with a disjoint variable condition. See spimv 1825 for another variant. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) | 
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | chvarfv 1714* | Implicit substitution of 𝑦 for 𝑥 into a theorem. Version of chvar 1771 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 1715 | 
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 1716 | 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 1717 | One of the two equality axioms of standard predicate calculus, called reflexivity of equality. (The other one is stdpc7 1784.) 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 1718 | Commutative law for equality. Lemma 7 of [Tarski] p. 69. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑦 = 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | ax6evr 1719* | A commuted form of a9ev 1711. 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 1720 | Commutative law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 20-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | equcomd 1721 | Deduction form of equcom 1720, symmetry of equality. For the versions for classes, see eqcom 2198 and eqcomd 2202. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑦 = 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | equcoms 1722 | 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 1723 | A transitive law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑦 = 𝑧 → 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | equtrr 1724 | 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 1725 | 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 1726 | An equivalence law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | equequ2 1727 | An equivalence law for equality. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | ax11i 1728 | Inference that has ax-11 1520 (without ∀𝑦) as its conclusion and does not require ax-10 1519, ax-11 1520, or ax12 1526 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))) | ||
| Theorem | ax10o 1729 | 
Show that ax-10o 1730 can be derived from ax-10 1519.  An open problem is
     whether this theorem can be derived from ax-10 1519 and the others when
     ax-11 1520 is replaced with ax-11o 1837.  See Theorem ax10 1731
for the
     rederivation of ax-10 1519 from ax10o 1729.
 Normally, ax10o 1729 should be used rather than ax-10o 1730, except by theorems specifically studying the latter's properties. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-2008.)  | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Axiom | ax-10o 1730 | 
Axiom ax-10o 1730 ("o" for "old") was the
original version of ax-10 1519,
     before it was discovered (in May 2008) that the shorter ax-10 1519 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 1729. Normally, ax10o 1729 should be used rather than ax-10o 1730, 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 1731 | 
Rederivation of ax-10 1519 from original version ax-10o 1730.  See Theorem
     ax10o 1729 for the derivation of ax-10o 1730 from ax-10 1519.
 This theorem should not be referenced in any proof. Instead, use ax-10 1519 above so that uses of ax-10 1519 can be more easily identified. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.)  | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | hbae 1732 | 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 1733 | All variables are effectively bound in an identical variable specifier. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) | 
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | hbaes 1734 | Rule that applies hbae 1732 to antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | hbnae 1735 | 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 1736 | All variables are effectively bound in a distinct variable specifier. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) | 
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | hbnaes 1737 | Rule that applies hbnae 1735 to antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | naecoms 1738 | A commutation rule for distinct variable specifiers. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) | 
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | equs4 1739 | 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 1740 | A useful equivalence related to substitution. New proofs should use equsal 1741 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 1741 | 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 1742 | 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 1743 | Deduction form of equsex 1742. (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 1744 | 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 1745 | 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 1746 | 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 1747 | 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 1748 | 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 1749 | Closed theorem form of spim 1752. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jan-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥((𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) ∧ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | spimt 1750 | Closed theorem form of spim 1752. (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 1751 | Specialization, using implicit substitition. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. The spim 1752 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 1752 | Specialization, using implicit substitution. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. The spim 1752 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 1753 | 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 1754 | Deduction version of spime 1755. (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 1755 | 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 1756 | Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because proofs are encouraged to use the weaker cbv3v 1758 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 1757 | 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 1758* | Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Version of cbv3 1756 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 1759 | 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 1760 | 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 1761* | 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 1762 | 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 1763 | 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 1764* | Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Version of cbv2 1763 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 1765* | Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Version of cbval 1768 with a disjoint variable condition. See cbvalvw 1934 for a version with two disjoint variable conditions, and cbvalv 1932 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 1766* | Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Version of cbvex 1770 with a disjoint variable condition. See cbvexvw 1935 for a version with two disjoint variable conditions, and cbvexv 1933 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 1767 | 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 1768 | 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 1769 | 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 1770 | 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 1771 | 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 1772 | 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 1773 | A variable elimination law for equality with no distinct variable requirements. (Compare equvini 1772.) (Contributed by NM, 1-Mar-2013.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑧(𝑧 = 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦) → 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | nfald 1774 | 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 1775 | 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) | ||
| Syntax | wsb 1776 | 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 1777 | 
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 1789.
 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 1854, sbcom2 2006 and sbid2v 2015). Note that our definition is valid even when 𝑥 and 𝑦 are replaced with the same variable, as sbid 1788 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 2010 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 2013. When 𝑥 and 𝑦 are distinct, we can express proper substitution with the simpler expressions of sb5 1902 and sb6 1901. 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 1778 | 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 1779 | 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 1780 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb2 1781 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbequ1 1782 | An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbequ2 1783 | An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | stdpc7 1784 | One of the two equality axioms of standard predicate calculus, called substitutivity of equality. (The other one is stdpc6 1717.) 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 1785 | An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbequ12r 1786 | 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 1787 | An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbid 1788 | 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 1789 | 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 1790 | 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) | ||
| Theorem | sbf 1791 | Substitution for a variable not free in a wff does not affect it. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) | 
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbf2 1792 | Substitution has no effect on a bound variable. (Contributed by NM, 1-Jul-2005.) | 
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb6x 1793 | Equivalence involving substitution for a variable not free. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nfs1f 1794 | If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑, it is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) | 
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | hbs1f 1795 | If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑, it is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbequ5 1796 | Substitution does not change an identical variable specifier. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 21-Dec-2004.) | 
| ⊢ ([𝑤 / 𝑧]∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | sbequ6 1797 | Substitution does not change a distinctor. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 14-May-2005.) | 
| ⊢ ([𝑤 / 𝑧] ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | sbt 1798 | A substitution into a theorem remains true. (See chvar 1771 and chvarv 1956 for versions using implicit substitition.) (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) | 
| ⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | equsb1 1799 | Substitution applied to an atomic wff. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | equsb2 1800 | Substitution applied to an atomic wff. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝑦 = 𝑥 | ||
| < Previous Next > | 
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |