![]() |
Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 41 of 135) | < 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 | opabbid 4001 | Equivalent wff's yield equal ordered-pair class abstractions (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜒}) | ||
Theorem | opabbidv 4002* | Equivalent wff's yield equal ordered-pair class abstractions (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1995.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜒}) | ||
Theorem | opabbii 4003 | Equivalent wff's yield equal class abstractions. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1995.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
Theorem | nfopab 4004* | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 1-Sep-1999.) Remove disjoint variable conditions. (Revised by Andrew Salmon, 11-Jul-2011.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧{〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
Theorem | nfopab1 4005 | The first abstraction variable in an ordered-pair class abstraction (class builder) is effectively not free. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥{〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
Theorem | nfopab2 4006 | The second abstraction variable in an ordered-pair class abstraction (class builder) is effectively not free. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦{〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
Theorem | cbvopab 4007* | Rule used to change bound variables in an ordered-pair class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 14-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓 & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑧, 𝑤〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
Theorem | cbvopabv 4008* | Rule used to change bound variables in an ordered-pair class abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 15-Oct-1996.) |
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑧, 𝑤〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
Theorem | cbvopab1 4009* | Change first bound variable in an ordered-pair class abstraction, using explicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 6-Oct-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑧, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
Theorem | cbvopab2 4010* | Change second bound variable in an ordered-pair class abstraction, using explicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-2013.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑥, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
Theorem | cbvopab1s 4011* | Change first bound variable in an ordered-pair class abstraction, using explicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-2003.) |
⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑧, 𝑦〉 ∣ [𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑} | ||
Theorem | cbvopab1v 4012* | Rule used to change the first bound variable in an ordered pair abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-2003.) (Proof shortened by Eric Schmidt, 4-Apr-2007.) |
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑧, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
Theorem | cbvopab2v 4013* | Rule used to change the second bound variable in an ordered pair abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Sep-1999.) |
⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑥, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
Theorem | csbopabg 4014* | Move substitution into a class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 6-Aug-2007.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌{〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑}) | ||
Theorem | unopab 4015 | Union of two ordered pair class abstractions. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2002.) |
⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓}) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)} | ||
Theorem | mpteq12f 4016 | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ ((∀𝑥 𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 = 𝐷) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | mpteq12dva 4017* | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jan-2017.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | mpteq12dv 4018* | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 24-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | mpteq12 4019* | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 = 𝐷) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | mpteq1 4020* | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | mpteq1d 4021* | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Jun-2016.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | mpteq2ia 4022 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | mpteq2i 4023 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐶 ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | mpteq12i 4024 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 27-Oct-2010.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐶 & ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐷 ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷) | ||
Theorem | mpteq2da 4025 | Slightly more general equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by FL, 14-Sep-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | mpteq2dva 4026* | Slightly more general equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 25-Apr-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | mpteq2dv 4027* | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 23-Aug-2014.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | nfmpt 4028* | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 20-Feb-2013.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | nfmpt1 4029 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by FL, 17-Feb-2008.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | cbvmptf 4030* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. This version has bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 9-Mar-2017.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐶 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | cbvmpt 4031* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. This version has bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2011.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐶 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | cbvmptv 4032* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Feb-2013.) |
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | mptv 4033* | Function with universal domain in maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-2013.) |
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ V ↦ 𝐵) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑦 = 𝐵} | ||
Syntax | wtr 4034 | Extend wff notation to include transitive classes. Notation from [TakeutiZaring] p. 35. |
wff Tr 𝐴 | ||
Definition | df-tr 4035 | Define the transitive class predicate. Definition of [Enderton] p. 71 extended to arbitrary classes. For alternate definitions, see dftr2 4036 (which is suggestive of the word "transitive"), dftr3 4038, dftr4 4039, and dftr5 4037. The term "complete" is used instead of "transitive" in Definition 3 of [Suppes] p. 130. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∪ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | dftr2 4036* | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. Exercise 7 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 40. (Contributed by NM, 24-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | dftr5 4037* | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. (Contributed by NM, 20-Mar-2004.) |
⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | dftr3 4038* | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. Definition 7.1 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 35. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | dftr4 4039 | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. Definition of [Enderton] p. 71. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝒫 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | treq 4040 | Equality theorem for the transitive class predicate. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (Tr 𝐴 ↔ Tr 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | trel 4041 | In a transitive class, the membership relation is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 19-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
⊢ (Tr 𝐴 → ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | trel3 4042 | In a transitive class, the membership relation is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 19-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ (Tr 𝐴 → ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐷 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | trss 4043 | An element of a transitive class is a subset of the class. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (Tr 𝐴 → (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | trin 4044 | The intersection of transitive classes is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 9-May-1994.) |
⊢ ((Tr 𝐴 ∧ Tr 𝐵) → Tr (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | tr0 4045 | The empty set is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 16-Sep-1993.) |
⊢ Tr ∅ | ||
Theorem | trv 4046 | The universe is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 14-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ Tr V | ||
Theorem | triun 4047* | The indexed union of a class of transitive sets is transitive. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Nov-2014.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝐵 → Tr ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | truni 4048* | The union of a class of transitive sets is transitive. Exercise 5(a) of [Enderton] p. 73. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 21-Feb-2011.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2014.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝑥 → Tr ∪ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | trint 4049* | The intersection of a class of transitive sets is transitive. Exercise 5(b) of [Enderton] p. 73. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 25-Feb-2011.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝑥 → Tr ∩ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | trintssm 4050* | Any inhabited transitive class includes its intersection. Similar to Exercise 3 in [TakeutiZaring] p. 44 (which mistakenly does not include the inhabitedness hypothesis). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ ((Tr 𝐴 ∧ ∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → ∩ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
Axiom | ax-coll 4051* | Axiom of Collection. Axiom 7 of [Crosilla], p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF" (with unnecessary quantifier removed). It is similar to bnd 4104 but uses a freeness hypothesis in place of one of the distinct variable constraints. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑏∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | repizf 4052* | Axiom of Replacement. Axiom 7' of [Crosilla], p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF" (with unnecessary quantifier removed). In our context this is not an axiom, but a theorem proved from ax-coll 4051. It is identical to zfrep6 4053 except for the choice of a freeness hypothesis rather than a distinct variable constraint between 𝑏 and 𝜑. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃!𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑏∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | zfrep6 4053* | A version of the Axiom of Replacement. Normally 𝜑 would have free variables 𝑥 and 𝑦. Axiom 6 of [Kunen] p. 12. The Separation Scheme ax-sep 4054 cannot be derived from this version and must be stated as a separate axiom in an axiom system (such as Kunen's) that uses this version. (Contributed by NM, 10-Oct-2003.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑤∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 𝜑) | ||
Axiom | ax-sep 4054* |
The Axiom of Separation of IZF set theory. Axiom 6 of [Crosilla], p.
"Axioms of CZF and IZF" (with unnecessary quantifier removed,
and with a
Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 condition replaced by a distinct
variable constraint between
𝑦 and 𝜑).
The Separation Scheme is a weak form of Frege's Axiom of Comprehension, conditioning it (with 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) so that it asserts the existence of a collection only if it is smaller than some other collection 𝑧 that already exists. This prevents Russell's paradox ru 2912. In some texts, this scheme is called "Aussonderung" or the Subset Axiom. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.) |
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | axsep2 4055* | A less restrictive version of the Separation Scheme ax-sep 4054, where variables 𝑥 and 𝑧 can both appear free in the wff 𝜑, which can therefore be thought of as 𝜑(𝑥, 𝑧). This version was derived from the more restrictive ax-sep 4054 with no additional set theory axioms. (Contributed by NM, 10-Dec-2006.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) |
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | zfauscl 4056* | Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using a class variable. To derive this from ax-sep 4054, we invoke the Axiom of Extensionality (indirectly via vtocl 2743), which is needed for the justification of class variable notation. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | bm1.3ii 4057* | Convert implication to equivalence using the Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) ax-sep 4054. Similar to Theorem 1.3ii of [BellMachover] p. 463. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥) ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | a9evsep 4058* | Derive a weakened version of ax-i9 1511, where 𝑥 and 𝑦 must be distinct, from Separation ax-sep 4054 and Extensionality ax-ext 2122. The theorem ¬ ∀𝑥¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 also holds (ax9vsep 4059), but in intuitionistic logic ∃𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 is stronger. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 25-Aug-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
Theorem | ax9vsep 4059* | Derive a weakened version of ax-9 1512, where 𝑥 and 𝑦 must be distinct, from Separation ax-sep 4054 and Extensionality ax-ext 2122. In intuitionistic logic a9evsep 4058 is stronger and also holds. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
Theorem | zfnuleu 4060* | Show the uniqueness of the empty set (using the Axiom of Extensionality via bm1.1 2125 to strengthen the hypothesis in the form of axnul 4061). (Contributed by NM, 22-Dec-2007.) |
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ⇒ ⊢ ∃!𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
Theorem | axnul 4061* |
The Null Set Axiom of ZF set theory: there exists a set with no
elements. Axiom of Empty Set of [Enderton] p. 18. In some textbooks,
this is presented as a separate axiom; here we show it can be derived
from Separation ax-sep 4054. This version of the Null Set Axiom tells us
that at least one empty set exists, but does not tell us that it is
unique - we need the Axiom of Extensionality to do that (see
zfnuleu 4060).
This theorem should not be referenced by any proof. Instead, use ax-nul 4062 below so that the uses of the Null Set Axiom can be more easily identified. (Contributed by Jeff Hoffman, 3-Feb-2008.) (Revised by NM, 4-Feb-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
Axiom | ax-nul 4062* | The Null Set Axiom of IZF set theory. It was derived as axnul 4061 above and is therefore redundant, but we state it as a separate axiom here so that its uses can be identified more easily. Axiom 4 of [Crosilla] p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF". (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2003.) |
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
Theorem | 0ex 4063 | The Null Set Axiom of ZF set theory: the empty set exists. Corollary 5.16 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 20. For the unabbreviated version, see ax-nul 4062. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
⊢ ∅ ∈ V | ||
Theorem | csbexga 4064 | The existence of proper substitution into a class. (Contributed by NM, 10-Nov-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∀𝑥 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | csbexa 4065 | The existence of proper substitution into a class. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2007.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 29-Jun-2011.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵 ∈ V | ||
Theorem | nalset 4066* | No set contains all sets. Theorem 41 of [Suppes] p. 30. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
Theorem | vnex 4067 | The universal class does not exist as a set. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2005.) |
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = V | ||
Theorem | vprc 4068 | The universal class is not a member of itself (and thus is not a set). Proposition 5.21 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 21; our proof, however, does not depend on the Axiom of Regularity. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ ¬ V ∈ V | ||
Theorem | nvel 4069 | The universal class does not belong to any class. (Contributed by FL, 31-Dec-2006.) |
⊢ ¬ V ∈ 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | inex1 4070 | Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using class notation. Compare Exercise 4 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V | ||
Theorem | inex2 4071 | Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐴) ∈ V | ||
Theorem | inex1g 4072 | Closed-form, generalized Separation Scheme. (Contributed by NM, 7-Apr-1995.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | ssex 4073 | The subset of a set is also a set. Exercise 3 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. This is one way to express the Axiom of Separation ax-sep 4054 (a.k.a. Subset Axiom). (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | ssexi 4074 | The subset of a set is also a set. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-1993.) |
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V | ||
Theorem | ssexg 4075 | The subset of a set is also a set. Exercise 3 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22 (generalized). (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | ssexd 4076 | A subclass of a set is a set. Deduction form of ssexg 4075. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | difexg 4077 | Existence of a difference. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1998.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵) ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | zfausab 4078* | Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) in terms of a class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)} ∈ V | ||
Theorem | rabexg 4079* | Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 23-Oct-1999.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | rabex 4080* | Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jul-1996.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V | ||
Theorem | elssabg 4081* | Membership in a class abstraction involving a subset. Unlike elabg 2834, 𝐴 does not have to be a set. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-2006.) |
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜑)} ↔ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | inteximm 4082* | The intersection of an inhabited class exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → ∩ 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | intexr 4083 | If the intersection of a class exists, the class is nonempty. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ (∩ 𝐴 ∈ V → 𝐴 ≠ ∅) | ||
Theorem | intnexr 4084 | If a class intersection is the universe, it is not a set. In classical logic this would be an equivalence. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ (∩ 𝐴 = V → ¬ ∩ 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | intexabim 4085 | The intersection of an inhabited class abstraction exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∩ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | intexrabim 4086 | The intersection of an inhabited restricted class abstraction exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → ∩ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | iinexgm 4087* | The existence of an indexed union. 𝑥 is normally a free-variable parameter in 𝐵, which should be read 𝐵(𝑥). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ ((∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → ∩ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | inuni 4088* | The intersection of a union ∪ 𝐴 with a class 𝐵 is equal to the union of the intersections of each element of 𝐴 with 𝐵. (Contributed by FL, 24-Mar-2007.) |
⊢ (∪ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) = ∪ {𝑥 ∣ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = (𝑦 ∩ 𝐵)} | ||
Theorem | elpw2g 4089 | Membership in a power class. Theorem 86 of [Suppes] p. 47. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2000.) |
⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | elpw2 4090 | Membership in a power class. Theorem 86 of [Suppes] p. 47. (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2007.) |
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | pwnss 4091 | The power set of a set is never a subset. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 22-Feb-2015.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ¬ 𝒫 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | pwne 4092 | No set equals its power set. The sethood antecedent is necessary; compare pwv 3743. (Contributed by NM, 17-Nov-2008.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 23-Dec-2016.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝒫 𝐴 ≠ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | repizf2lem 4093 | Lemma for repizf2 4094. If we have a function-like proposition which provides at most one value of 𝑦 for each 𝑥 in a set 𝑤, we can change "at most one" to "exactly one" by restricting the values of 𝑥 to those values for which the proposition provides a value of 𝑦. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Sep-2018.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∃*𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∣ ∃𝑦𝜑}∃!𝑦𝜑) | ||
Theorem | repizf2 4094* | Replacement. This version of replacement is stronger than repizf 4052 in the sense that 𝜑 does not need to map all values of 𝑥 in 𝑤 to a value of 𝑦. The resulting set contains those elements for which there is a value of 𝑦 and in that sense, this theorem combines repizf 4052 with ax-sep 4054. Another variation would be ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑤∃*𝑦𝜑 → {𝑦 ∣ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝜑)} ∈ V but we don't have a proof of that yet. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Sep-2018.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∃*𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑧∀𝑥 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∣ ∃𝑦𝜑}∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | class2seteq 4095* | Equality theorem for classes and sets . (Contributed by NM, 13-Dec-2005.) (Proof shortened by Raph Levien, 30-Jun-2006.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝐴 ∈ V} = 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | 0elpw 4096 | Every power class contains the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2007.) |
⊢ ∅ ∈ 𝒫 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | 0nep0 4097 | The empty set and its power set are not equal. (Contributed by NM, 23-Dec-1993.) |
⊢ ∅ ≠ {∅} | ||
Theorem | 0inp0 4098 | Something cannot be equal to both the null set and the power set of the null set. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = ∅ → ¬ 𝐴 = {∅}) | ||
Theorem | unidif0 4099 | The removal of the empty set from a class does not affect its union. (Contributed by NM, 22-Mar-2004.) |
⊢ ∪ (𝐴 ∖ {∅}) = ∪ 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | iin0imm 4100* | An indexed intersection of the empty set, with an inhabited index set, is empty. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ (∃𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 → ∩ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∅ = ∅) |
< Previous Next > |
Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |