| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 45 of 165) | < 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 | po3nr 4401 | 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 4402 | 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 4403* | 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 4404 | A strict linear order is a strict partial order. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 Or 𝐴 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | soss 4405 | 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 4406 | Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Or 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | soeq2 4407 | Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Or 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | sonr 4408 | A strict order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-1995.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | sotr 4409 | 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 4410* | An irreflexive, transitive, trichotomous relation is a linear ordering (in the sense of df-iso 4388). (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 4411 | 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 4412 | 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 4413 | 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 4414 | One direction of sotritric 4415 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 4415 | 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 4416 | 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 4417 | 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 ∅ | ||
| Syntax | wfrfor 4418 | Extend wff notation to include the well-founded predicate. |
| wff FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑆 | ||
| Syntax | wfr 4419 | Extend wff notation to include the well-founded predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is a well-founded relation on 𝐴.' |
| wff 𝑅 Fr 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | wse 4420 | Extend wff notation to include the set-like predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is set-like on 𝐴.' |
| wff 𝑅 Se 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | wwe 4421 | Extend wff notation to include the well-ordering predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 well-orders 𝐴.' |
| wff 𝑅 We 𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-frfor 4422* | 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 4423* | 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 4424* | Define the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Nov-2014.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 {𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝑦𝑅𝑥} ∈ V) | ||
| Definition | df-wetr 4425* | 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 4613). 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 4426* | 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 4427 | Any relation on a set is set-like on it. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 22-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | sess1 4428 | Subset theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ⊆ 𝑆 → (𝑆 Se 𝐴 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | sess2 4429 | Subset theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → (𝑅 Se 𝐵 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | seeq1 4430 | Equality theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Se 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | seeq2 4431 | Equality theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Se 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | nfse 4432 | 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 4433 | 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 4434 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑇 ↔ FrFor 𝑆𝐴𝑇)) | ||
| Theorem | freq1 4435 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Fr 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | frforeq2 4436 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑇 ↔ FrFor 𝑅𝐵𝑇)) | ||
| Theorem | freq2 4437 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Fr 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | frforeq3 4438 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑆 = 𝑇 → ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑆 ↔ FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑇)) | ||
| Theorem | nffrfor 4439 | 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 4440 | 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 4441 | 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 4442 | Any relation is well-founded on the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ 𝑅 Fr ∅ | ||
| Theorem | frind 4443* | 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 4444 | 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 4445 | 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 4446 | 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 | ||
| Theorem | weeq1 4447 | Equality theorem for the well-ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 We 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 We 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | weeq2 4448 | Equality theorem for the well-ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 We 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 We 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | wefr 4449 | A well-ordering is well-founded. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 We 𝐴 → 𝑅 Fr 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | wepo 4450 | A well-ordering is a partial ordering. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | wetrep 4451* | An epsilon well-ordering is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (( E We 𝐴 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | we0 4452 | Any relation is a well-ordering of the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ 𝑅 We ∅ | ||
| Syntax | word 4453 | Extend the definition of a wff to include the ordinal predicate. |
| wff Ord 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | con0 4454 | Extend the definition of a class to include the class of all ordinal numbers. (The 0 in the name prevents creating a file called con.html, which causes problems in Windows.) |
| class On | ||
| Syntax | wlim 4455 | Extend the definition of a wff to include the limit ordinal predicate. |
| wff Lim 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | csuc 4456 | Extend class notation to include the successor function. |
| class suc 𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-iord 4457* |
Define the ordinal predicate, which is true for a class that is
transitive and whose elements are transitive. Definition of ordinal in
[Crosilla], p. "Set-theoretic
principles incompatible with
intuitionistic logic".
Some sources will define a notation for ordinal order corresponding to < and ≤ but we just use ∈ and ⊆ respectively. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 10-Oct-2018.) Use its alias dford3 4458 instead for naming consistency with set.mm. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 ↔ (Tr 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | dford3 4458* | Alias for df-iord 4457. Use it instead of df-iord 4457 for naming consistency with set.mm. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 10-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 ↔ (Tr 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝑥)) | ||
| Definition | df-on 4459 | Define the class of all ordinal numbers. Definition 7.11 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 38. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ On = {𝑥 ∣ Ord 𝑥} | ||
| Definition | df-ilim 4460 | Define the limit ordinal predicate, which is true for an ordinal that has the empty set as an element and is not a successor (i.e. that is the union of itself). Our definition combines the definition of Lim of [BellMachover] p. 471 and Exercise 1 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 42, and then changes 𝐴 ≠ ∅ to ∅ ∈ 𝐴 (which would be equivalent given the law of the excluded middle, but which is not for us). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 11-Nov-2018.) Use its alias dflim2 4461 instead for naming consistency with set.mm. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 ↔ (Ord 𝐴 ∧ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 = ∪ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dflim2 4461 | Alias for df-ilim 4460. Use it instead of df-ilim 4460 for naming consistency with set.mm. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2004.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 ↔ (Ord 𝐴 ∧ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 = ∪ 𝐴)) | ||
| Definition | df-suc 4462 | Define the successor of a class. When applied to an ordinal number, the successor means the same thing as "plus 1". Definition 7.22 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 41, who use "+ 1" to denote this function. Our definition is a generalization to classes. Although it is not conventional to use it with proper classes, it has no effect on a proper class (sucprc 4503). Some authors denote the successor operation with a prime (apostrophe-like) symbol, such as Definition 6 of [Suppes] p. 134 and the definition of successor in [Mendelson] p. 246 (who uses the symbol "Suc" as a predicate to mean "is a successor ordinal"). The definition of successor of [Enderton] p. 68 denotes the operation with a plus-sign superscript. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ suc 𝐴 = (𝐴 ∪ {𝐴}) | ||
| Theorem | ordeq 4463 | Equality theorem for the ordinal predicate. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (Ord 𝐴 ↔ Ord 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | elong 4464 | An ordinal number is an ordinal set. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ On ↔ Ord 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | elon 4465 | An ordinal number is an ordinal set. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On ↔ Ord 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | eloni 4466 | An ordinal number has the ordinal property. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → Ord 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | elon2 4467 | An ordinal number is an ordinal set. (Contributed by NM, 8-Feb-2004.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On ↔ (Ord 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ V)) | ||
| Theorem | limeq 4468 | Equality theorem for the limit predicate. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (Lim 𝐴 ↔ Lim 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | ordtr 4469 | An ordinal class is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → Tr 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | ordelss 4470 | An element of an ordinal class is a subset of it. (Contributed by NM, 30-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ ((Ord 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | trssord 4471 | A transitive subclass of an ordinal class is ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 29-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ ((Tr 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ Ord 𝐵) → Ord 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | ordelord 4472 | An element of an ordinal class is ordinal. Proposition 7.6 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 36. (Contributed by NM, 23-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ ((Ord 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → Ord 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | tron 4473 | The class of all ordinal numbers is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-2009.) |
| ⊢ Tr On | ||
| Theorem | ordelon 4474 | An element of an ordinal class is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 26-Oct-2003.) |
| ⊢ ((Ord 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | onelon 4475 | An element of an ordinal number is an ordinal number. Theorem 2.2(iii) of [BellMachover] p. 469. (Contributed by NM, 26-Oct-2003.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | ordin 4476 | The intersection of two ordinal classes is ordinal. Proposition 7.9 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 37. (Contributed by NM, 9-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ ((Ord 𝐴 ∧ Ord 𝐵) → Ord (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | onin 4477 | The intersection of two ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 7-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | onelss 4478 | An element of an ordinal number is a subset of the number. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | ordtr1 4479 | Transitive law for ordinal classes. (Contributed by NM, 12-Dec-2004.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐶 → ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | ontr1 4480 | Transitive law for ordinal numbers. Theorem 7M(b) of [Enderton] p. 192. (Contributed by NM, 11-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐶 ∈ On → ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | onintss 4481* | If a property is true for an ordinal number, then the minimum ordinal number for which it is true is smaller or equal. Theorem Schema 61 of [Suppes] p. 228. (Contributed by NM, 3-Oct-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → (𝜓 → ∩ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | ord0 4482 | The empty set is an ordinal class. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ Ord ∅ | ||
| Theorem | 0elon 4483 | The empty set is an ordinal number. Corollary 7N(b) of [Enderton] p. 193. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ ∅ ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | inton 4484 | The intersection of the class of ordinal numbers is the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 20-Oct-2003.) |
| ⊢ ∩ On = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | nlim0 4485 | The empty set is not a limit ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 24-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ ¬ Lim ∅ | ||
| Theorem | limord 4486 | A limit ordinal is ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-1995.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 → Ord 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | limuni 4487 | A limit ordinal is its own supremum (union). (Contributed by NM, 4-May-1995.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 → 𝐴 = ∪ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | limuni2 4488 | The union of a limit ordinal is a limit ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 19-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 → Lim ∪ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | 0ellim 4489 | A limit ordinal contains the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 → ∅ ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | limelon 4490 | A limit ordinal class that is also a set is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 26-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ Lim 𝐴) → 𝐴 ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | onn0 4491 | The class of all ordinal numbers is not empty. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1995.) |
| ⊢ On ≠ ∅ | ||
| Theorem | onm 4492 | The class of all ordinal numbers is inhabited. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Mar-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | suceq 4493 | Equality of successors. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → suc 𝐴 = suc 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | elsuci 4494 | Membership in a successor. This one-way implication does not require that either 𝐴 or 𝐵 be sets. (Contributed by NM, 6-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ suc 𝐵 → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐴 = 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | elsucg 4495 | Membership in a successor. Exercise 5 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 17. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ suc 𝐵 ↔ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐴 = 𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | elsuc2g 4496 | Variant of membership in a successor, requiring that 𝐵 rather than 𝐴 be a set. (Contributed by NM, 28-Oct-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ suc 𝐵 ↔ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐴 = 𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | elsuc 4497 | Membership in a successor. Exercise 5 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 17. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2003.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ suc 𝐵 ↔ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐴 = 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | elsuc2 4498 | Membership in a successor. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2003.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ suc 𝐴 ↔ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∨ 𝐵 = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | nfsuc 4499 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for successor. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2003.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 suc 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | elelsuc 4500 | Membership in a successor. (Contributed by NM, 20-Jun-1998.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ suc 𝐵) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |