| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 19 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 | sbiedh 1801 | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution (deduction version of sbieh 1804). New proofs should use sbied 1802 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 1802 | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution (deduction version of sbie 1805). (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 1803* | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution (deduction version of sbie 1805). (Contributed by NM, 7-Jan-2017.) | 
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | sbieh 1804 | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution. New proofs should use sbie 1805 instead. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (New usage is discouraged.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | sbie 1805 | 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 1806* | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution. Version of sbie 1805 with a disjoint variable condition. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Jan-2023.) | 
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | equsalv 1807* | An equivalence related to implicit substitution. Version of equsal 1741 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 1808 | A property related to substitution that unlike equs5 1843 doesn't require a distinctor antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) | 
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | equs5e 1809 | A property related to substitution that unlike equs5 1843 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 1810 | Analogue to ax-11 1520 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 1811 | Quantifier Substitution for existential quantifiers. Analogue to ax10o 1729 but for ∃ rather than ∀. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Dec-2017.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | drex1 1812 | 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 1813 | 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 1814 | 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 1815 | A version of sb4 1846 that doesn't require a distinctor antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) | 
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | equs45f 1816 | 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 1817 | 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 1818 | 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 1819 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution that unlike sb4 1846 doesn't require a distinctor antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) | 
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | hbsb2a 1820 | 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 1821 | 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 1822 | 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 1823 | 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 1824 | Version of sbco 1987 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 1825* | A version of spim 1752 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 1826* | A "distinctor elimination" lemma with no restrictions on variables in the consequent, proved without using ax-16 1828. (Contributed by NM, 8-Nov-2006.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 21-Jun-2011.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 𝑤 = 𝑣) | ||
| Theorem | ax16 1827* | 
Theorem showing that ax-16 1828 is redundant if ax-17 1540 is included in the
       axiom system.  The important part of the proof is provided by aev 1826.
 See ax16ALT 1873 for an alternate proof that does not require ax-10 1519 or ax12 1526. This theorem should not be referenced in any proof. Instead, use ax-16 1828 below so that theorems needing ax-16 1828 can be more easily identified. (Contributed by NM, 8-Nov-2006.)  | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Axiom | ax-16 1828* | 
Axiom of Distinct Variables.  The only axiom of predicate calculus
       requiring that variables be distinct (if we consider ax-17 1540 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 1540; see Theorem ax16 1827. This axiom is obsolete and should no longer be used. It is proved above as Theorem ax16 1827. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.)  | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | dveeq2 1829* | 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 1830* | Quantifier introduction when one pair of variables is distinct. Like dveeq2 1829 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 1831* | Proof of dvelimf 2034 using dveeq2 1829 (shown as the last hypothesis) instead of ax12 1526. This shows that ax12 1526 could be replaced by dveeq2 1829 (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 1832* | A lemma for proving conditionless ZFC axioms. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jan-2002.) | 
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | exlimdv 1833* | Deduction from Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | ax11v2 1834* | Recovery of ax11o 1836 from ax11v 1841 without using ax-11 1520. The hypothesis is even weaker than ax11v 1841, 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 1836. (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 1835* | Derive ax-11o 1837 from a hypothesis in the form of ax-11 1520. The hypothesis is even weaker than ax-11 1520, 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 1836. (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 1836 | 
Derivation of set.mm's original ax-11o 1837 from the shorter ax-11 1520 that
       has replaced it.
 An open problem is whether this theorem can be proved without relying on ax-16 1828 or ax-17 1540. Normally, ax11o 1836 should be used rather than ax-11o 1837, 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 1837 | 
Axiom ax-11o 1837 ("o" for "old") was the
original version of ax-11 1520,
     before it was discovered (in Jan. 2007) that the shorter ax-11 1520 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 1836. This axiom is obsolete and should no longer be used. It is proved above as Theorem ax11o 1836. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.)  | 
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | albidv 1838* | Formula-building rule for universal quantifier (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | exbidv 1839* | Formula-building rule for existential quantifier (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | ax11b 1840 | A bidirectional version of ax-11o 1837. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-2006.) | 
| ⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | ax11v 1841* | This is a version of ax-11o 1837 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 1842* | Analogue to ax11v 1841 for existential quantification. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 9-Jan-2018.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | equs5 1843 | 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 1844 | Lemma used in proofs of substitution properties. Like equs5 1843 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 1845 | 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 1846 | 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 1847 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution when variables are distinct. Similar to sb4 1846 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 1848 | 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 1849 | 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 1850 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nfsb2or 1851 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. Similar to hbsb2 1850 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 1852 | Propositional logic lemma used in the sbequi 1853 proof. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Feb-2018.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃))) & ⊢ (𝜏 ∨ (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜂))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜏 ∨ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜂)))) | ||
| Theorem | sbequi 1853 | 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 1854 | 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 1855 | 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 1856 | 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 1857 | 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 1858 | 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 1859 | Deduction substituting both sides of a biconditional. New proofs should use sbbid 1860 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 1860 | 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 1861 | 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 1862 | 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 1863 | An identity law for substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbid2 1864 | 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 1865 | 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 1866 | 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 1867 | 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 1868 | 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 1869 | 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 1870 | 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 1871 | 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 1872* | Inference with ax-16 1828 as its conclusion, that 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. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-2008.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | ax16ALT 1873* | Version of ax16 1827 that does not require ax-10 1519 or ax12 1526 for its proof. (Contributed by NM, 17-May-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | spv 1874* | Specialization, using implicit substitition. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | spimev 1875* | Distinct-variable version of spime 1755. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | speiv 1876* | Inference from existential specialization, using implicit substitition. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ 𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | equvin 1877* | 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 1878* | A generalization of Axiom ax-16 1828. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑧𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | a16gb 1879* | A generalization of Axiom ax-16 1828. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | a16nf 1880* | 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 1881* | 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 1882* | 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 1883* | 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 1884* | 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 1885* | 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 1886 | 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 1887* | 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 1597 via the use of distinct variable conditions combined with ax-17 1540. 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 2050 derived from df-eu 2048. 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 1888* | Inference from Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | alrimivv 1889* | Inference from Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-1995.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | alrimdv 1890* | Deduction from Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 10-Feb-1997.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | nfdv 1891* | Apply the definition of not-free in a context. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | 2ax17 1892* | Quantification of two variables over a formula in which they do not occur. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 12-Apr-2011.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | alimdv 1893* | Deduction from Theorem 19.20 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | eximdv 1894* | Deduction from Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 2alimdv 1895* | Deduction from Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-2004.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 2eximdv 1896* | Deduction from Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-1995.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓 → ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.23v 1897* | Special case of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 28-Jun-1998.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.23vv 1898* | Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90 extended to two variables. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-2004.) | 
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | sbbidv 1899* | Deduction substituting both sides of a biconditional, with 𝜑 and 𝑥 disjoint. See also sbbid 1860. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 6-May-2023.) (Proof shortened by Steven Nguyen, 6-Jul-2023.) | 
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ [𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | sb56 1900* | Two equivalent ways of expressing the proper substitution of 𝑦 for 𝑥 in 𝜑, when 𝑥 and 𝑦 are distinct. Theorem 6.2 of [Quine] p. 40. The proof does not involve df-sb 1777. (Contributed by NM, 14-Apr-2008.) | 
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| < Previous Next > | 
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |