P. 42 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 4101-4200   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	truni 4101*	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 4102*	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 4103*	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)
2.2  IZF Set Theory - add the Axioms of Collection and Separation
2.2.1  Introduce the Axiom of Collection
Axiom	ax-coll 4104*	Axiom of Collection. Axiom 7 of [Crosilla], p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF" (with unnecessary quantifier removed). It is similar to bnd 4158 but uses a freeness hypothesis in place of one of the distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Aug-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑏∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑)
Theorem	repizf 4105*	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 4104. It is identical to zfrep6 4106 except for the choice of a freeness hypothesis rather than a disjoint variable condition between 𝑏 and 𝜑. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Aug-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃!𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑏∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑏 𝜑)
Theorem	zfrep6 4106*	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 4107 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)
2.2.2  Introduce the Axiom of Separation
Axiom	ax-sep 4107*	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 disjoint variable condition 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 2954. 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 4108*	A less restrictive version of the Separation Scheme ax-sep 4107, 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 4107 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 4109*	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using a class variable. To derive this from ax-sep 4107, we invoke the Axiom of Extensionality (indirectly via vtocl 2784), 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 4110*	Convert implication to equivalence using the Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) ax-sep 4107. 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 4111*	Derive a weakened version of ax-i9 1523, where 𝑥 and 𝑦 must be distinct, from Separation ax-sep 4107 and Extensionality ax-ext 2152. The theorem ¬ ∀𝑥¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 also holds (ax9vsep 4112), 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 4112*	Derive a weakened version of ax-9 1524, where 𝑥 and 𝑦 must be distinct, from Separation ax-sep 4107 and Extensionality ax-ext 2152. In intuitionistic logic a9evsep 4111 is stronger and also holds. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦
2.2.3  Derive the Null Set Axiom
Theorem	zfnuleu 4113*	Show the uniqueness of the empty set (using the Axiom of Extensionality via bm1.1 2155 to strengthen the hypothesis in the form of axnul 4114). (Contributed by NM, 22-Dec-2007.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥    ⇒   ⊢ ∃!𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	axnul 4114*	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 4107. 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 4113). This theorem should not be referenced by any proof. Instead, use ax-nul 4115 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 4115*	The Null Set Axiom of IZF set theory. It was derived as axnul 4114 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 4116	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 4115. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.)
⊢ ∅ ∈ V
Theorem	csbexga 4117	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 4118	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
2.2.4  Theorems requiring subset and intersection existence
Theorem	nalset 4119*	No set contains all sets. Theorem 41 of [Suppes] p. 30. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	vnex 4120	The universal class does not exist as a set. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2005.)
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = V
Theorem	vprc 4121	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 4122	The universal class does not belong to any class. (Contributed by FL, 31-Dec-2006.)
⊢ ¬ V ∈ 𝐴
Theorem	inex1 4123	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 4124	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐴) ∈ V
Theorem	inex1g 4125	Closed-form, generalized Separation Scheme. (Contributed by NM, 7-Apr-1995.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V)
Theorem	ssex 4126	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 4107 (a.k.a. Subset Axiom). (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	ssexi 4127	The subset of a set is also a set. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-1993.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V
Theorem	ssexg 4128	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 4129	A subclass of a set is a set. Deduction form of ssexg 4128. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	difexg 4130	Existence of a difference. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1998.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵) ∈ V)
Theorem	zfausab 4131*	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) in terms of a class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jun-1994.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)} ∈ V
Theorem	rabexg 4132*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 23-Oct-1999.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V)
Theorem	rabex 4133*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jul-1996.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V
Theorem	elssabg 4134*	Membership in a class abstraction involving a subset. Unlike elabg 2876, 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 4135*	The intersection of an inhabited class exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → ∩ 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	intexr 4136	If the intersection of a class exists, the class is nonempty. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (∩ 𝐴 ∈ V → 𝐴 ≠ ∅)
Theorem	intnexr 4137	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 4138	The intersection of an inhabited class abstraction exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 27-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∩ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V)
Theorem	intexrabim 4139	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 4140*	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 4141*	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 4142	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 4143	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	elpwi2 4144	Membership in a power class. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 3-Mar-2021.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 26-May-2024.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵
Theorem	pwnss 4145	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 4146	No set equals its power set. The sethood antecedent is necessary; compare pwv 3795. (Contributed by NM, 17-Nov-2008.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 23-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝒫 𝐴 ≠ 𝐴)
Theorem	repizf2lem 4147	Lemma for repizf2 4148. 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 4148*	Replacement. This version of replacement is stronger than repizf 4105 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 4105 with ax-sep 4107. 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)
2.2.5  Theorems requiring empty set existence
Theorem	class2seteq 4149*	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 4150	Every power class contains the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2007.)
⊢ ∅ ∈ 𝒫 𝐴
Theorem	0nep0 4151	The empty set and its power set are not equal. (Contributed by NM, 23-Dec-1993.)
⊢ ∅ ≠ {∅}
Theorem	0inp0 4152	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 4153	The removal of the empty set from a class does not affect its union. (Contributed by NM, 22-Mar-2004.)
⊢ ∪ (𝐴 ∖ {∅}) = ∪ 𝐴
Theorem	iin0imm 4154*	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 ∅ = ∅)
Theorem	iin0r 4155*	If an indexed intersection of the empty set is empty, the index set is nonempty. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (∩ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∅ = ∅ → 𝐴 ≠ ∅)
Theorem	intv 4156	The intersection of the universal class is empty. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2008.)
⊢ ∩ V = ∅
Theorem	axpweq 4157*	Two equivalent ways to express the Power Set Axiom. Note that ax-pow 4160 is not used by the proof. (Contributed by NM, 22-Jun-2009.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝒫 𝐴 ∈ V ↔ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥))
2.2.6  Collection principle
Theorem	bnd 4158*	A very strong generalization of the Axiom of Replacement (compare zfrep6 4106). Its strength lies in the rather profound fact that 𝜑(𝑥, 𝑦) does not have to be a "function-like" wff, as it does in the standard Axiom of Replacement. This theorem is sometimes called the Boundedness Axiom. In the context of IZF, it is just a slight variation of ax-coll 4104. (Contributed by NM, 17-Oct-2004.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑤∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 𝜑)
Theorem	bnd2 4159*	A variant of the Boundedness Axiom bnd 4158 that picks a subset 𝑧 out of a possibly proper class 𝐵 in which a property is true. (Contributed by NM, 4-Feb-2004.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → ∃𝑧(𝑧 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 𝜑))
2.3  IZF Set Theory - add the Axioms of Power Sets and Pairing
2.3.1  Introduce the Axiom of Power Sets
Axiom	ax-pow 4160*	Axiom of Power Sets. An axiom of Intuitionistic Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. It states that a set 𝑦 exists that includes the power set of a given set 𝑥 i.e. contains every subset of 𝑥. This is Axiom 8 of [Crosilla] p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF" except (a) unnecessary quantifiers are removed, and (b) Crosilla has a biconditional rather than an implication (but the two are equivalent by bm1.3ii 4110). The variant axpow2 4162 uses explicit subset notation. A version using class notation is pwex 4169. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑧(∀𝑤(𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 → 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥) → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)
Theorem	zfpow 4161*	Axiom of Power Sets expressed with the fewest number of different variables. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-2003.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)
Theorem	axpow2 4162*	A variant of the Axiom of Power Sets ax-pow 4160 using subset notation. Problem in {BellMachover] p. 466. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-2006.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝑧 ⊆ 𝑥 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)
Theorem	axpow3 4163*	A variant of the Axiom of Power Sets ax-pow 4160. For any set 𝑥, there exists a set 𝑦 whose members are exactly the subsets of 𝑥 i.e. the power set of 𝑥. Axiom Pow of [BellMachover] p. 466. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-2006.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝑧 ⊆ 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)
Theorem	el 4164*	Every set is an element of some other set. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
⊢ ∃𝑦 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦
Theorem	vpwex 4165	Power set axiom: the powerclass of a set is a set. Axiom 4 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 17. (Contributed by NM, 30-Oct-2003.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) Revised to prove pwexg 4166 from vpwex 4165. (Revised by BJ, 10-Aug-2022.)
⊢ 𝒫 𝑥 ∈ V
Theorem	pwexg 4166	Power set axiom expressed in class notation, with the sethood requirement as an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 30-Oct-2003.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝒫 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	pwexd 4167	Deduction version of the power set axiom. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 26-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝒫 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	abssexg 4168*	Existence of a class of subsets. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jul-2006.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)} ∈ V)
Theorem	pwex 4169	Power set axiom expressed in class notation. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ 𝒫 𝐴 ∈ V
Theorem	snexg 4170	A singleton whose element exists is a set. The 𝐴 ∈ V case of Theorem 7.12 of [Quine] p. 51, proved using only Extensionality, Power Set, and Separation. Replacement is not needed. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Sep-2018.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝐴} ∈ V)
Theorem	snex 4171	A singleton whose element exists is a set. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-May-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ {𝐴} ∈ V
Theorem	snexprc 4172	A singleton whose element is a proper class is a set. The ¬ 𝐴 ∈ V case of Theorem 7.12 of [Quine] p. 51, proved using only Extensionality, Power Set, and Separation. Replacement is not needed. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 1-Sep-2018.)
⊢ (¬ 𝐴 ∈ V → {𝐴} ∈ V)
Theorem	notnotsnex 4173	A singleton is never a proper class. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 3-Jul-2022.)
⊢ ¬ ¬ {𝐴} ∈ V
Theorem	p0ex 4174	The power set of the empty set (the ordinal 1) is a set. (Contributed by NM, 23-Dec-1993.)
⊢ {∅} ∈ V
Theorem	pp0ex 4175	{∅, {∅}} (the ordinal 2) is a set. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.)
⊢ {∅, {∅}} ∈ V
Theorem	ord3ex 4176	The ordinal number 3 is a set, proved without the Axiom of Union. (Contributed by NM, 2-May-2009.)
⊢ {∅, {∅}, {∅, {∅}}} ∈ V
Theorem	dtruarb 4177*	At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). This theorem asserts the existence of two sets which do not equal each other; compare with dtruex 4543 in which we are given a set 𝑦 and go from there to a set 𝑥 which is not equal to it. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Sep-2018.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∃𝑦 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	pwuni 4178	A class is a subclass of the power class of its union. Exercise 6(b) of [Enderton] p. 38. (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-1996.)
⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝒫 ∪ 𝐴
Theorem	undifexmid 4179*	Union of complementary parts producing the whole and excluded middle. Although special cases such as undifss 3495 and undifdcss 6900 are provable, the full statement implies excluded middle as shown here. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 16-Jun-2022.)
⊢ (𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∪ (𝑦 ∖ 𝑥)) = 𝑦)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑)
2.3.2  A notation for excluded middle
Syntax	wem 4180	Formula for an abbreviation of excluded middle.
wff EXMID
Definition	df-exmid 4181	The expression EXMID will be used as a readable shorthand for any form of the law of the excluded middle; this is a useful shorthand largely because it hides statements of the form "for any proposition" in a system which can only quantify over sets, not propositions. To see how this compares with other ways of expressing excluded middle, compare undifexmid 4179 with exmidundif 4192. The former may be more recognizable as excluded middle because it is in terms of propositions, and the proof may be easier to follow for much the same reason (it just has to show 𝜑 and ¬ 𝜑 in the the relevant parts of the proof). The latter, however, has the key advantage of being able to prove both directions of the biconditional. To state that excluded middle implies a proposition is hard to do gracefully without EXMID, because there is no way to write a hypothesis 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑 for an arbitrary proposition; instead the hypothesis would need to be the particular instance of excluded middle which that proof needs. Or to say it another way, EXMID implies DECID 𝜑 by exmidexmid 4182 but there is no good way to express the converse. This definition and how we use it is easiest to understand (and most appropriate to assign the name "excluded middle" to) if we assume ax-sep 4107, in which case EXMID means that all propositions are decidable (see exmidexmid 4182 and notice that it relies on ax-sep 4107). If we instead work with ax-bdsep 13919, EXMID as defined here means that all bounded propositions are decidable. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ⊆ {∅} → DECID ∅ ∈ 𝑥))
Theorem	exmidexmid 4182	EXMID implies that an arbitrary proposition is decidable. That is, EXMID captures the usual meaning of excluded middle when stated in terms of propositions. To get other propositional statements which are equivalent to excluded middle, combine this with notnotrdc 838, peircedc 909, or condc 848. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
⊢ (EXMID → DECID 𝜑)
Theorem	ss1o0el1 4183	A subclass of {∅} contains the empty set if and only if it equals {∅}. (Contributed by BJ and Jim Kingdon, 9-Aug-2024.)
⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ {∅} → (∅ ∈ 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 = {∅}))
Theorem	exmid01 4184	Excluded middle is equivalent to saying any subset of {∅} is either ∅ or {∅}. (Contributed by BJ and Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ⊆ {∅} → (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝑥 = {∅})))
Theorem	pwntru 4185	A slight strengthening of pwtrufal 14030. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 12-Sep-2023.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ {∅} ∧ 𝐴 ≠ {∅}) → 𝐴 = ∅)
Theorem	exmid1dc 4186*	A convenience theorem for proving that something implies EXMID. Think of this as an alternative to using a proposition, as in proofs like undifexmid 4179 or ordtriexmid 4505. In this context 𝑥 = {∅} can be thought of as "x is true". (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Nov-2023.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ⊆ {∅}) → DECID 𝑥 = {∅})    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → EXMID)
Theorem	exmidn0m 4187*	Excluded middle is equivalent to any set being empty or inhabited. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥))
Theorem	exmidsssn 4188*	Excluded middle is equivalent to the biconditionalized version of sssnr 3740 for sets. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥 ⊆ {𝑦} ↔ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝑥 = {𝑦})))
Theorem	exmidsssnc 4189*	Excluded middle in terms of subsets of a singleton. This is similar to exmid01 4184 but lets you choose any set as the element of the singleton rather than just ∅. It is similar to exmidsssn 4188 but for a particular set 𝐵 rather than all sets. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Jul-2023.)
⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ⊆ {𝐵} → (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝑥 = {𝐵}))))
Theorem	exmid0el 4190	Excluded middle is equivalent to decidability of ∅ being an element of an arbitrary set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥DECID ∅ ∈ 𝑥)
Theorem	exmidel 4191*	Excluded middle is equivalent to decidability of membership for two arbitrary sets. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦DECID 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦)
Theorem	exmidundif 4192*	Excluded middle is equivalent to every subset having a complement. That is, the union of a subset and its relative complement being the whole set. Although special cases such as undifss 3495 and undifdcss 6900 are provable, the full statement is equivalent to excluded middle as shown here. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Jun-2022.)
⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∪ (𝑦 ∖ 𝑥)) = 𝑦))
Theorem	exmidundifim 4193*	Excluded middle is equivalent to every subset having a complement. Variation of exmidundif 4192 with an implication rather than a biconditional. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 16-Feb-2023.)
⊢ (EXMID ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 → (𝑥 ∪ (𝑦 ∖ 𝑥)) = 𝑦))
2.3.3  Axiom of Pairing
Axiom	ax-pr 4194*	The Axiom of Pairing of IZF set theory. Axiom 2 of [Crosilla] p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF", except (a) unnecessary quantifiers are removed, and (b) Crosilla has a biconditional rather than an implication (but the two are equivalent by bm1.3ii 4110). (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2006.)
⊢ ∃𝑧∀𝑤((𝑤 = 𝑥 ∨ 𝑤 = 𝑦) → 𝑤 ∈ 𝑧)
Theorem	zfpair2 4195	Derive the abbreviated version of the Axiom of Pairing from ax-pr 4194. (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2006.)
⊢ {𝑥, 𝑦} ∈ V
Theorem	prexg 4196	The Axiom of Pairing using class variables. Theorem 7.13 of [Quine] p. 51, but restricted to classes which exist. For proper classes, see prprc 3693, prprc1 3691, and prprc2 3692. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 16-Sep-2018.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → {𝐴, 𝐵} ∈ V)
Theorem	snelpwi 4197	A singleton of a set belongs to the power class of a class containing the set. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 25-Aug-2011.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → {𝐴} ∈ 𝒫 𝐵)
Theorem	snelpw 4198	A singleton of a set belongs to the power class of a class containing the set. (Contributed by NM, 1-Apr-1998.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ {𝐴} ∈ 𝒫 𝐵)
Theorem	prelpwi 4199	A pair of two sets belongs to the power class of a class containing those two sets. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 10-Mar-2017.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → {𝐴, 𝐵} ∈ 𝒫 𝐶)
Theorem	rext 4200*	A theorem similar to extensionality, requiring the existence of a singleton. Exercise 8 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 16. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)