| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 19 of 164) | < 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 | stdpc4 1801 | 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 1802 | 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 1803 | 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 1804 | Substitution has no effect on a bound variable. (Contributed by NM, 1-Jul-2005.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb6x 1805 | 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 1806 | 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 1807 | 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 1808 | 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 1809 | 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 1810 | A substitution into a theorem remains true. (See chvar 1783 and chvarv 1968 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 1811 | Substitution applied to an atomic wff. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | equsb2 1812 | Substitution applied to an atomic wff. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝑦 = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | sbiedh 1813 | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution (deduction version of sbieh 1816). New proofs should use sbied 1814 instead. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | sbied 1814 | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution (deduction version of sbie 1817). (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | sbiedv 1815* | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution (deduction version of sbie 1817). (Contributed by NM, 7-Jan-2017.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | sbieh 1816 | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution. New proofs should use sbie 1817 instead. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | sbie 1817 | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 30-Apr-2018.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | sbiev 1818* | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution. Version of sbie 1817 with a disjoint variable condition. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Jan-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | equsalv 1819* | An equivalence related to implicit substitution. Version of equsal 1753 with a disjoint variable condition. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | equs5a 1820 | A property related to substitution that unlike equs5 1855 doesn't require a distinctor antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | equs5e 1821 | A property related to substitution that unlike equs5 1855 doesn't require a distinctor antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | ax11e 1822 | Analogue to ax-11 1532 but for existential quantification. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 31-Dec-2017.) (Proved by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) → ∃𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | ax10oe 1823 | Quantifier Substitution for existential quantifiers. Analogue to ax10o 1741 but for ∃ rather than ∀. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | drex1 1824 | 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.) (Revised by NM, 3-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | drsb1 1825 | 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, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | exdistrfor 1826 | Distribution of existential quantifiers, with a bound-variable hypothesis saying that 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, but 𝑥 can be free in 𝜑 (and there is no distinct variable condition on 𝑥 and 𝑦). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 25-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | sb4a 1827 | A version of sb4 1858 that doesn't require a distinctor antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | equs45f 1828 | Two ways of expressing substitution when 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 25-Apr-2008.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb6f 1829 | Equivalence for substitution when 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 30-Apr-2008.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb5f 1830 | Equivalence for substitution when 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by NM, 18-May-2008.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb4e 1831 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution that unlike sb4 1858 doesn't require a distinctor antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | hbsb2a 1832 | Special case of a bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | hbsb2e 1833 | Special case of a bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]∃𝑦𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | hbsb3 1834 | If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | nfs1 1835 | If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | sbcof2 1836 | Version of sbco 1999 where 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | spimv 1837* | A version of spim 1764 with a distinct variable requirement instead of a bound-variable hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | aev 1838* | A "distinctor elimination" lemma with no restrictions on variables in the consequent, proved without using ax-16 1840. (Contributed by NM, 8-Nov-2006.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 21-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 𝑤 = 𝑣) | ||
| Theorem | ax16 1839* |
Theorem showing that ax-16 1840 is redundant if ax-17 1552 is included in the
axiom system. The important part of the proof is provided by aev 1838.
See ax16ALT 1885 for an alternate proof that does not require ax-10 1531 or ax12 1538. This theorem should not be referenced in any proof. Instead, use ax-16 1840 below so that theorems needing ax-16 1840 can be more easily identified. (Contributed by NM, 8-Nov-2006.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Axiom | ax-16 1840* |
Axiom of Distinct Variables. The only axiom of predicate calculus
requiring that variables be distinct (if we consider ax-17 1552 to be a
metatheorem and not an axiom). Axiom scheme C16' in [Megill] p. 448 (p.
16 of the preprint). It apparently does not otherwise appear in the
literature but is easily proved from textbook predicate calculus by
cases. It is a somewhat bizarre axiom since the antecedent is always
false in set theory, but nonetheless it is technically necessary as you
can see from its uses.
This axiom is redundant if we include ax-17 1552; see Theorem ax16 1839. This axiom is obsolete and should no longer be used. It is proved above as Theorem ax16 1839. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | dveeq2 1841* | Quantifier introduction when one pair of variables is distinct. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | dveeq2or 1842* | Quantifier introduction when one pair of variables is distinct. Like dveeq2 1841 but connecting ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 by a disjunction rather than negation and implication makes the theorem stronger in intuitionistic logic. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | dvelimfALT2 1843* | Proof of dvelimf 2046 using dveeq2 1841 (shown as the last hypothesis) instead of ax12 1538. This shows that ax12 1538 could be replaced by dveeq2 1841 (the last hypothesis). (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 21-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑧𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦)) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | nd5 1844* | A lemma for proving conditionless ZFC axioms. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jan-2002.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | exlimdv 1845* | Deduction from Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | ax11v2 1846* | Recovery of ax11o 1848 from ax11v 1853 without using ax-11 1532. The hypothesis is even weaker than ax11v 1853, with 𝑧 both distinct from 𝑥 and not occurring in 𝜑. Thus the hypothesis provides an alternate axiom that can be used in place of ax11o 1848. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑧 → 𝜑))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax11a2 1847* | Derive ax-11o 1849 from a hypothesis in the form of ax-11 1532. The hypothesis is even weaker than ax-11 1532, with 𝑧 both distinct from 𝑥 and not occurring in 𝜑. Thus the hypothesis provides an alternate axiom that can be used in place of ax11o 1848. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (∀𝑧𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑧 → 𝜑))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax11o 1848 |
Derivation of set.mm's original ax-11o 1849 from the shorter ax-11 1532 that
has replaced it.
An open problem is whether this theorem can be proved without relying on ax-16 1840 or ax-17 1552. Normally, ax11o 1848 should be used rather than ax-11o 1849, except by theorems specifically studying the latter's properties. (Contributed by NM, 3-Feb-2007.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) | ||
| Axiom | ax-11o 1849 |
Axiom ax-11o 1849 ("o" for "old") was the
original version of ax-11 1532,
before it was discovered (in Jan. 2007) that the shorter ax-11 1532 could
replace it. It appears as Axiom scheme C15' in [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of
the preprint). It is based on Lemma 16 of [Tarski] p. 70 and Axiom C8 of
[Monk2] p. 105, from which it can be proved
by cases. To understand this
theorem more easily, think of "¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 →..." as informally
meaning "if 𝑥 and 𝑦 are distinct variables,
then..." The
antecedent becomes false if the same variable is substituted for 𝑥 and
𝑦, ensuring the theorem is sound
whenever this is the case. In some
later theorems, we call an antecedent of the form ¬
∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 a
"distinctor."
This axiom is redundant, as shown by Theorem ax11o 1848. This axiom is obsolete and should no longer be used. It is proved above as Theorem ax11o 1848. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | albidv 1850* | Formula-building rule for universal quantifier (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | exbidv 1851* | Formula-building rule for existential quantifier (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | ax11b 1852 | A bidirectional version of ax-11o 1849. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-2006.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | ax11v 1853* | This is a version of ax-11o 1849 when the variables are distinct. Axiom (C8) of [Monk2] p. 105. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Jim Kingdon, 15-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | ax11ev 1854* | Analogue to ax11v 1853 for existential quantification. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 9-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | equs5 1855 | Lemma used in proofs of substitution properties. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | equs5or 1856 | Lemma used in proofs of substitution properties. Like equs5 1855 but, in intuitionistic logic, replacing negation and implication with disjunction makes this a stronger result. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | sb3 1857 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution when variables are distinct. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb4 1858 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution when variables are distinct. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | sb4or 1859 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution when variables are distinct. Similar to sb4 1858 but stronger in intuitionistic logic. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ∀𝑥([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | sb4b 1860 | Simplified definition of substitution when variables are distinct. (Contributed by NM, 27-May-1997.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | sb4bor 1861 | Simplified definition of substitution when variables are distinct, expressed via disjunction. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Mar-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ∀𝑥([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | hbsb2 1862 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nfsb2or 1863 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. Similar to hbsb2 1862 but in intuitionistic logic a disjunction is stronger than an implication. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbequilem 1864 | Propositional logic lemma used in the sbequi 1865 proof. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃))) & ⊢ (𝜏 ∨ (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜂))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜏 ∨ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜂)))) | ||
| Theorem | sbequi 1865 | An equality theorem for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof modified by Jim Kingdon, 1-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑥 / 𝑧]𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑧]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbequ 1866 | An equality theorem for substitution. Used in proof of Theorem 9.7 in [Megill] p. 449 (p. 16 of the preprint). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑥 / 𝑧]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑧]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | drsb2 1867 | 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 → ([𝑥 / 𝑧]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑧]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | spsbe 1868 | A specialization theorem, mostly the same as Theorem 19.8 of [Margaris] p. 89. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | spsbim 1869 | Specialization of implication. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 21-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | spsbbi 1870 | Specialization of biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 21-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | sbbidh 1871 | Deduction substituting both sides of a biconditional. New proofs should use sbbid 1872 instead. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | sbbid 1872 | Deduction substituting both sides of a biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1993.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | sbequ8 1873 | Elimination of equality from antecedent after substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof revised by Jim Kingdon, 20-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥](𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbft 1874 | Substitution has no effect on a nonfree variable. (Contributed by NM, 30-May-2009.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-May-2018.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbid2h 1875 | An identity law for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbid2 1876 | An identity law for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbidm 1877 | An idempotent law for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 21-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb5rf 1878 | Reversed substitution. (Contributed by NM, 3-Feb-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦(𝑦 = 𝑥 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb6rf 1879 | Reversed substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦(𝑦 = 𝑥 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb8h 1880 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb8eh 1881 | Substitution of variable in existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb8 1882 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb8e 1883 | Substitution of variable in existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | ax16i 1884* | Inference with ax-16 1840 as its conclusion, that does not require ax-10 1531, ax-11 1532, or ax12 1538 for its proof. The hypotheses may be eliminable without one or more of these axioms in special cases. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-2008.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | ax16ALT 1885* | Version of ax16 1839 that does not require ax-10 1531 or ax12 1538 for its proof. (Contributed by NM, 17-May-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | spv 1886* | Specialization, using implicit substitition. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | spimev 1887* | Distinct-variable version of spime 1767. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | speiv 1888* | Inference from existential specialization, using implicit substitition. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ 𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | equvin 1889* | A variable introduction law for equality. Lemma 15 of [Monk2] p. 109. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑧(𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | a16g 1890* | A generalization of Axiom ax-16 1840. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑧𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | a16gb 1891* | A generalization of Axiom ax-16 1840. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | a16nf 1892* | If there is only one element in the universe, then everything satisfies Ⅎ. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑧𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | 2albidv 1893* | Formula-building rule for 2 existential quantifiers (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 4-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 2exbidv 1894* | Formula-building rule for 2 existential quantifiers (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 1-May-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 3exbidv 1895* | Formula-building rule for 3 existential quantifiers (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 1-May-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 4exbidv 1896* | Formula-building rule for 4 existential quantifiers (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.9v 1897* | Special case of Theorem 19.9 of [Margaris] p. 89. (Contributed by NM, 28-May-1995.) (Revised by NM, 21-May-2007.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | exlimdd 1898 | Existential elimination rule of natural deduction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒 & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | 19.21v 1899* | Special case of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. Notational convention: We sometimes suffix with "v" the label of a theorem eliminating a hypothesis such as (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) in 19.21 1609 via the use of distinct variable conditions combined with ax-17 1552. Conversely, we sometimes suffix with "f" the label of a theorem introducing such a hypothesis to eliminate the need for the distinct variable condition; e.g., euf 2062 derived from df-eu 2060. The "f" stands for "not free in" which is less restrictive than "does not occur in". (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | alrimiv 1900* | Inference from Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |