| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 45 of 167) | < 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 | swopo 4401* | 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 4402 | A partial order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | potr 4403 | 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 4404 | 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 4405 | 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 4406 | 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 4407* | 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 4408 | A strict linear order is a strict partial order. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 Or 𝐴 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | soss 4409 | 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 4410 | Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Or 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | soeq2 4411 | Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Or 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | sonr 4412 | A strict order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-1995.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | sotr 4413 | 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 4414* | An irreflexive, transitive, trichotomous relation is a linear ordering (in the sense of df-iso 4392). (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 4415 | 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 4416 | 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 4417 | 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 4418 | One direction of sotritric 4419 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 4419 | 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 4420 | 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 4421 | 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 4422 | Extend wff notation to include the well-founded predicate. |
| wff FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑆 | ||
| Syntax | wfr 4423 | Extend wff notation to include the well-founded predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is a well-founded relation on 𝐴.' |
| wff 𝑅 Fr 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | wse 4424 | Extend wff notation to include the set-like predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is set-like on 𝐴.' |
| wff 𝑅 Se 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | wwe 4425 | Extend wff notation to include the well-ordering predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 well-orders 𝐴.' |
| wff 𝑅 We 𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-frfor 4426* | 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 4427* | 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 4428* | Define the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Nov-2014.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 {𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝑦𝑅𝑥} ∈ V) | ||
| Definition | df-wetr 4429* | 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 4617). 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 4430* | 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 4431 | Any relation on a set is set-like on it. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 22-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | sess1 4432 | Subset theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ⊆ 𝑆 → (𝑆 Se 𝐴 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | sess2 4433 | Subset theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → (𝑅 Se 𝐵 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | seeq1 4434 | Equality theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Se 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | seeq2 4435 | Equality theorem for the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Se 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | nfse 4436 | 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 4437 | 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 4438 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑇 ↔ FrFor 𝑆𝐴𝑇)) | ||
| Theorem | freq1 4439 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Fr 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | frforeq2 4440 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑇 ↔ FrFor 𝑅𝐵𝑇)) | ||
| Theorem | freq2 4441 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Fr 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | frforeq3 4442 | Equality theorem for the well-founded predicate. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑆 = 𝑇 → ( FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑆 ↔ FrFor 𝑅𝐴𝑇)) | ||
| Theorem | nffrfor 4443 | 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 4444 | 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 4445 | 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 4446 | Any relation is well-founded on the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ 𝑅 Fr ∅ | ||
| Theorem | frind 4447* | 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 4448 | 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 4449 | 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 4450 | 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 4451 | Equality theorem for the well-ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 We 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 We 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | weeq2 4452 | Equality theorem for the well-ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 We 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 We 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | wefr 4453 | A well-ordering is well-founded. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 We 𝐴 → 𝑅 Fr 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | wepo 4454 | A well-ordering is a partial ordering. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | wetrep 4455* | 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 4456 | Any relation is a well-ordering of the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ 𝑅 We ∅ | ||
| Syntax | word 4457 | Extend the definition of a wff to include the ordinal predicate. |
| wff Ord 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | con0 4458 | 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 4459 | Extend the definition of a wff to include the limit ordinal predicate. |
| wff Lim 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | csuc 4460 | Extend class notation to include the successor function. |
| class suc 𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-iord 4461* |
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 4462 instead for naming consistency with set.mm. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 ↔ (Tr 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | dford3 4462* | Alias for df-iord 4461. Use it instead of df-iord 4461 for naming consistency with set.mm. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 10-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 ↔ (Tr 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝑥)) | ||
| Definition | df-on 4463 | 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 4464 | 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 4465 instead for naming consistency with set.mm. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 ↔ (Ord 𝐴 ∧ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 = ∪ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dflim2 4465 | Alias for df-ilim 4464. Use it instead of df-ilim 4464 for naming consistency with set.mm. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2004.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 ↔ (Ord 𝐴 ∧ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 = ∪ 𝐴)) | ||
| Definition | df-suc 4466 | 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 4507). 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 4467 | Equality theorem for the ordinal predicate. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (Ord 𝐴 ↔ Ord 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | elong 4468 | An ordinal number is an ordinal set. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ On ↔ Ord 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | elon 4469 | An ordinal number is an ordinal set. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On ↔ Ord 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | eloni 4470 | An ordinal number has the ordinal property. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → Ord 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | elon2 4471 | An ordinal number is an ordinal set. (Contributed by NM, 8-Feb-2004.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On ↔ (Ord 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ V)) | ||
| Theorem | limeq 4472 | 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 4473 | An ordinal class is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → Tr 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | ordelss 4474 | 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 4475 | 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 4476 | 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 4477 | The class of all ordinal numbers is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-2009.) |
| ⊢ Tr On | ||
| Theorem | ordelon 4478 | An element of an ordinal class is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 26-Oct-2003.) |
| ⊢ ((Ord 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | onelon 4479 | 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 4480 | 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 4481 | 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 4482 | 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 4483 | Transitive law for ordinal classes. (Contributed by NM, 12-Dec-2004.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐶 → ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | ontr1 4484 | 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 4485* | 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 4486 | The empty set is an ordinal class. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ Ord ∅ | ||
| Theorem | 0elon 4487 | The empty set is an ordinal number. Corollary 7N(b) of [Enderton] p. 193. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ ∅ ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | inton 4488 | The intersection of the class of ordinal numbers is the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 20-Oct-2003.) |
| ⊢ ∩ On = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | nlim0 4489 | 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 4490 | A limit ordinal is ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-1995.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 → Ord 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | limuni 4491 | A limit ordinal is its own supremum (union). (Contributed by NM, 4-May-1995.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 → 𝐴 = ∪ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | limuni2 4492 | The union of a limit ordinal is a limit ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 19-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 → Lim ∪ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | 0ellim 4493 | A limit ordinal contains the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Lim 𝐴 → ∅ ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | limelon 4494 | 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 4495 | The class of all ordinal numbers is not empty. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1995.) |
| ⊢ On ≠ ∅ | ||
| Theorem | onm 4496 | The class of all ordinal numbers is inhabited. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Mar-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | suceq 4497 | 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 4498 | 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 4499 | 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 4500 | 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))) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |