P. 45 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 4401-4500   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	opelopabsbALT 4401*	The law of concretion in terms of substitutions. Less general than opelopabsb 4402, but having a much shorter proof. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2002.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (⟨𝑧, 𝑤⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑤 / 𝑦][𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	opelopabsb 4402*	The law of concretion in terms of substitutions. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2002.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.)
⊢ (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥][𝐵 / 𝑦]𝜑)
Theorem	brabsb 4403*	The law of concretion in terms of substitutions. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-2008.)
⊢ 𝑅 = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥][𝐵 / 𝑦]𝜑)
Theorem	opelopabt 4404*	Closed theorem form of opelopab 4414. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-2013.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ∧ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊)) → (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	opelopabga 4405*	The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.)
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	brabga 4406*	The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.)
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ 𝑅 = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑}    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	opelopab2a 4407*	Ordered pair membership in an ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.)
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ 𝜑)} ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	opelopaba 4408*	The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	braba 4409*	The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by NM, 19-Dec-2013.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ 𝑅 = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	opelopabg 4410*	The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by NM, 28-May-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	brabg 4411*	The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1999.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ 𝑅 = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑}    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	opelopabgf 4412*	The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. This version of opelopabg 4410 uses bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 8-Jul-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜒    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	opelopab2 4413*	Ordered pair membership in an ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2007.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ 𝜑)} ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	opelopab 4414*	The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-1995.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒)
Theorem	brab 4415*	The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1999.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ 𝑅 = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜒)
Theorem	opelopabaf 4416*	The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. This version of opelopab 4414 uses bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	opelopabf 4417*	The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. This version of opelopab 4414 uses bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by NM, 19-Dec-2008.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜒    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒)
Theorem	ssopab2 4418	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-May-2013.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜓})
Theorem	ssopab2b 4419	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1996.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.)
⊢ ({⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	ssopab2i 4420	Inference of ordered pair abstraction subclass from implication. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜓}
Theorem	ssopab2dv 4421*	Inference of ordered pair abstraction subclass from implication. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jan-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜓} ⊆ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜒})
Theorem	eqopab2b 4422	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction equality and biconditional. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Jan-2017.)
⊢ ({⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	opabm 4423*	Inhabited ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Sep-2018.)
⊢ (∃𝑧 𝑧 ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	iunopab 4424*	Move indexed union inside an ordered-pair abstraction. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Feb-2015.)
⊢ ∪ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑} = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑}
Theorem	elopabr 4425*	Membership in an ordered-pair class abstraction defined by a binary relation. (Contributed by AV, 16-Feb-2021.) (Proof shortened by SN, 11-Dec-2024.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝑥𝑅𝑦} → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑅)
Theorem	elopabran 4426*	Membership in an ordered-pair class abstraction defined by a restricted binary relation. (Contributed by AV, 16-Feb-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝜓)} → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑅)
2.3.6  Power class of union and intersection
Theorem	pwin 4427	The power class of the intersection of two classes is the intersection of their power classes. Exercise 4.12(j) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.)
⊢ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) = (𝒫 𝐴 ∩ 𝒫 𝐵)
Theorem	pwunss 4428	The power class of the union of two classes includes the union of their power classes. Exercise 4.12(k) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.)
⊢ (𝒫 𝐴 ∪ 𝒫 𝐵) ⊆ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵)
Theorem	pwssunim 4429	The power class of the union of two classes is a subset of the union of their power classes, if one class is a subclass of the other. One direction of Exercise 4.12(l) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴) → 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ⊆ (𝒫 𝐴 ∪ 𝒫 𝐵))
Theorem	pwundifss 4430	Break up the power class of a union into a union of smaller classes. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ ((𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∖ 𝒫 𝐴) ∪ 𝒫 𝐴) ⊆ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵)
Theorem	pwunim 4431	The power class of the union of two classes equals the union of their power classes, iff one class is a subclass of the other. Part of Exercise 7(b) of [Enderton] p. 28. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴) → 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) = (𝒫 𝐴 ∪ 𝒫 𝐵))
2.3.7  Epsilon and identity relations
Syntax	cep 4432	Extend class notation to include the epsilon relation.
class E
Syntax	cid 4433	Extend the definition of a class to include identity relation.
class I
Definition	df-eprel 4434*	Define the epsilon relation. Similar to Definition 6.22 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 30. The epsilon relation and set membership are the same, that is, (𝐴 E 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵) when 𝐵 is a set by epelg 4435. Thus, 5 E { 1 , 5 }. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.)
⊢ E = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦}
Theorem	epelg 4435	The epsilon relation and membership are the same. General version of epel 4437. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 27-Mar-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.)
⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 E 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵))
Theorem	epelc 4436	The epsilon relationship and the membership relation are the same. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 11-Apr-2012.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 E 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)
Theorem	epel 4437	The epsilon relation and the membership relation are the same. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.)
⊢ (𝑥 E 𝑦 ↔ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦)
Definition	df-id 4438*	Define the identity relation. Definition 9.15 of [Quine] p. 64. For example, 5 I 5 and ¬ 4 I 5. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.)
⊢ I = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝑥 = 𝑦}
2.3.8  Partial and total orderings We have not yet defined relations (df-rel 4781), but here we introduce a few related notions we will use to develop ordinals. The class variable 𝑅 is no different from other class variables, but it reminds us that typically it represents what we will later call a "relation".
Syntax	wpo 4439	Extend wff notation to include the strict partial ordering predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is a partial order on 𝐴.'
wff 𝑅 Po 𝐴
Syntax	wor 4440	Extend wff notation to include the strict linear ordering predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 orders 𝐴.'
wff 𝑅 Or 𝐴
Definition	df-po 4441*	Define the strict partial order predicate. Definition of [Enderton] p. 168. The expression 𝑅 Po 𝐴 means 𝑅 is a partial order on 𝐴. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.)
⊢ (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (¬ 𝑥𝑅𝑥 ∧ ((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧)))
Definition	df-iso 4442*	Define the strict linear order predicate. The expression 𝑅 Or 𝐴 is true if relationship 𝑅 orders 𝐴. The property 𝑥𝑅𝑦 → (𝑥𝑅𝑧 ∨ 𝑧𝑅𝑦) is called weak linearity by Proposition 11.2.3 of [HoTT], p. (varies). If we assumed excluded middle, it would be equivalent to trichotomy, 𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∨ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦𝑅𝑥. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) (Revised by Jim Kingdon, 4-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥𝑅𝑦 → (𝑥𝑅𝑧 ∨ 𝑧𝑅𝑦))))
Theorem	poss 4443	Subset theorem for the partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.)
⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → (𝑅 Po 𝐵 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴))
Theorem	poeq1 4444	Equality theorem for partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Po 𝐴))
Theorem	poeq2 4445	Equality theorem for partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Po 𝐵))
Theorem	nfpo 4446	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for partial orders. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑅 Po 𝐴
Theorem	nfso 4447	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for total orders. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑅 Or 𝐴
Theorem	pocl 4448	Properties of partial order relation in class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
⊢ (𝑅 Po 𝐴 → ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴) → (¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵 ∧ ((𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷))))
Theorem	ispod 4449*	Sufficient conditions for a partial order. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2014.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝑥𝑅𝑥)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴)
Theorem	swopolem 4450*	Perform the substitutions into the strict weak ordering law. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Dec-2014.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 → (𝑥𝑅𝑧 ∨ 𝑧𝑅𝑦)))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑋 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑍 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑋𝑅𝑌 → (𝑋𝑅𝑍 ∨ 𝑍𝑅𝑌)))
Theorem	swopo 4451*	A strict weak order is a partial order. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑦𝑅𝑧 → ¬ 𝑧𝑅𝑦))    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 → (𝑥𝑅𝑧 ∨ 𝑧𝑅𝑦)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴)
Theorem	poirr 4452	A partial order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵)
Theorem	potr 4453	A partial order relation is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷))
Theorem	po2nr 4454	A partial order relation has no 2-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐵))
Theorem	po3nr 4455	A partial order relation has no 3-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷 ∧ 𝐷𝑅𝐵))
Theorem	po0 4456	Any relation is a partial ordering of the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
⊢ 𝑅 Po ∅
Theorem	pofun 4457*	A function preserves a partial order relation. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 18-Jun-2011.)
⊢ 𝑆 = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝑋𝑅𝑌}    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑋 = 𝑌)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐵 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑋 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝑆 Po 𝐴)
Theorem	sopo 4458	A strict linear order is a strict partial order. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.)
⊢ (𝑅 Or 𝐴 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴)
Theorem	soss 4459	Subset theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → (𝑅 Or 𝐵 → 𝑅 Or 𝐴))
Theorem	soeq1 4460	Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Or 𝐴))
Theorem	soeq2 4461	Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Or 𝐵))
Theorem	sonr 4462	A strict order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-1995.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵)
Theorem	sotr 4463	A strict order relation is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷))
Theorem	issod 4464*	An irreflexive, transitive, trichotomous relation is a linear ordering (in the sense of df-iso 4442). (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∨ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦𝑅𝑥))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Or 𝐴)
Theorem	sowlin 4465	A strict order relation satisfies weak linearity. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝐵𝑅𝐶 → (𝐵𝑅𝐷 ∨ 𝐷𝑅𝐶)))
Theorem	so2nr 4466	A strict order relation has no 2-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐵))
Theorem	so3nr 4467	A strict order relation has no 3-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷 ∧ 𝐷𝑅𝐵))
Theorem	sotricim 4468	One direction of sotritric 4469 holds for all weakly linear orders. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Sep-2019.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝐵𝑅𝐶 → ¬ (𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵)))
Theorem	sotritric 4469	A trichotomy relationship, given a trichotomous order. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Sep-2019.)
⊢ 𝑅 Or 𝐴    &   ⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∨ 𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ↔ ¬ (𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵)))
Theorem	sotritrieq 4470	A trichotomy relationship, given a trichotomous order. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 13-Dec-2019.)
⊢ 𝑅 Or 𝐴    &   ⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∨ 𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝐵 = 𝐶 ↔ ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵)))
Theorem	so0 4471	Any relation is a strict ordering of the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
⊢ 𝑅 Or ∅
2.3.9  Founded and set-like relations
Syntax	wfrfor 4472	Extend wff notation to include the well-founded predicate.
wff FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑆
Syntax	wfr 4473	Extend wff notation to include the well-founded predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is a well-founded relation on 𝐴.'
wff 𝑅 Fr 𝐴
Syntax	wse 4474	Extend wff notation to include the set-like predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is set-like on 𝐴.'
wff 𝑅 Se 𝐴
Syntax	wwe 4475	Extend wff notation to include the well-ordering predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 well-orders 𝐴.'
wff 𝑅 We 𝐴
Definition	df-frfor 4476*	Define the well-founded relation predicate where 𝐴 might be a proper class. By passing in 𝑆 we allow it potentially to be a proper class rather than a set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon and Mario Carneiro, 22-Sep-2021.)
⊢ ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑆 ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑦𝑅𝑥 → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑆) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑆) → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝑆))
Definition	df-frind 4477*	Define the well-founded relation predicate. In the presence of excluded middle, there are a variety of equivalent ways to define this. In our case, this definition, in terms of an inductive principle, works better than one along the lines of "there is an element which is minimal when A is ordered by R". Because 𝑠 is constrained to be a set (not a proper class) here, sometimes it may be necessary to use FrFor directly rather than via Fr. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon and Mario Carneiro, 21-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑠 FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑠)
Definition	df-se 4478*	Define the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Nov-2014.)
⊢ (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 {𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝑦𝑅𝑥} ∈ V)
Definition	df-wetr 4479*	Define the well-ordering predicate. It is unusual to define "well-ordering" in the absence of excluded middle, but we mean an ordering which is like the ordering which we have for ordinals (for example, it does not entail trichotomy because ordinals do not have that as seen at ordtriexmid 4668). Given excluded middle, well-ordering is usually defined to require trichotomy (and the definition of Fr is typically also different). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 23-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 We 𝐴 ↔ (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧)))
Theorem	seex 4480*	The 𝑅-preimage of an element of the base set in a set-like relation is a set. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Nov-2014.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Se 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝑥𝑅𝐵} ∈ V)
Theorem	exse 4481	Any relation on a set is set-like on it. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 22-Jun-2015.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴)
Theorem	sess1 4482	Subset theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.)
⊢ (𝑅 ⊆ 𝑆 → (𝑆 Se 𝐴 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴))
Theorem	sess2 4483	Subset theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.)
⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → (𝑅 Se 𝐵 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴))
Theorem	seeq1 4484	Equality theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Se 𝐴))
Theorem	seeq2 4485	Equality theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Se 𝐵))
Theorem	nfse 4486	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for set-like relations. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑅 Se 𝐴
Theorem	epse 4487	The epsilon relation is set-like on any class. (This is the origin of the term "set-like": a set-like relation "acts like" the epsilon relation of sets and their elements.) (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 22-Jun-2015.)
⊢ E Se 𝐴
Theorem	frforeq1 4488	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑇 ↔ FrFor 𝑆𝐴𝑇))
Theorem	freq1 4489	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1997.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Fr 𝐴))
Theorem	frforeq2 4490	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑇 ↔ FrFor 𝑅𝐵𝑇))
Theorem	freq2 4491	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Fr 𝐵))
Theorem	frforeq3 4492	Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝑆 = 𝑇 → ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑆 ↔ FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑇))
Theorem	nffrfor 4493	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for well-founded relations. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑆    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑆
Theorem	nffr 4494	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for well-founded relations. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑅 Fr 𝐴
Theorem	frirrg 4495	A well-founded relation is irreflexive. This is the case where 𝐴 exists. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Sep-2021.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵)
Theorem	fr0 4496	Any relation is well-founded on the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.)
⊢ 𝑅 Fr ∅
Theorem	frind 4497*	Induction over a well-founded set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → (∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑦𝑅𝑥 → 𝜓) → 𝜑))    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝑅 Fr 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝜑)
Theorem	efrirr 4498	Irreflexivity of the epsilon relation: a class founded by epsilon is not a member of itself. (Contributed by NM, 18-Apr-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 22-Jun-2015.)
⊢ ( E Fr 𝐴 → ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐴)
Theorem	tz7.2 4499	Similar to Theorem 7.2 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 35, of except that the Axiom of Regularity is not required due to antecedent E Fr 𝐴. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-1994.)
⊢ ((Tr 𝐴 ∧ E Fr 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐴))
Theorem	nfwe 4500	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for well-orderings. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑅 We 𝐴