![]() |
Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 46 of 157) | < 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 | rabxfrd 4501* | Class builder membership after substituting an expression 𝐴 (containing 𝑦) for 𝑥 in the class expression 𝜒. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2012.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐶 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷) → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐷) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (𝐶 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐷 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ 𝐵 ∈ {𝑦 ∈ 𝐷 ∣ 𝜒})) | ||
Theorem | rabxfr 4502* | Class builder membership after substituting an expression 𝐴 (containing 𝑦) for 𝑥 in the class expression 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jun-2005.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐶 & ⊢ (𝑦 ∈ 𝐷 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐷) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐷 → (𝐶 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐷 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝐵 ∈ {𝑦 ∈ 𝐷 ∣ 𝜓})) | ||
Theorem | reuhypd 4503* | A theorem useful for eliminating restricted existential uniqueness hypotheses. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶) → (𝑥 = 𝐴 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝐵)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐶) → ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝑥 = 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | reuhyp 4504* | A theorem useful for eliminating restricted existential uniqueness hypotheses. (Contributed by NM, 15-Nov-2004.) |
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) & ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶) → (𝑥 = 𝐴 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝐵)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 → ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝑥 = 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | uniexb 4505 | The Axiom of Union and its converse. A class is a set iff its union is a set. (Contributed by NM, 11-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ V ↔ ∪ 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | pwexb 4506 | The Axiom of Power Sets and its converse. A class is a set iff its power class is a set. (Contributed by NM, 11-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ V ↔ 𝒫 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | elpwpwel 4507 | A class belongs to a double power class if and only if its union belongs to the power class. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Jan-2023.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝒫 𝐵 ↔ ∪ 𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | univ 4508 | The union of the universe is the universe. Exercise 4.12(c) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 14-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ ∪ V = V | ||
Theorem | eldifpw 4509 | Membership in a power class difference. (Contributed by NM, 25-Mar-2007.) |
⊢ 𝐶 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵 ∧ ¬ 𝐶 ⊆ 𝐵) → (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) ∈ (𝒫 (𝐵 ∪ 𝐶) ∖ 𝒫 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | op1stb 4510 | Extract the first member of an ordered pair. Theorem 73 of [Suppes] p. 42. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ∩ ∩ 〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | op1stbg 4511 | Extract the first member of an ordered pair. Theorem 73 of [Suppes] p. 42. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 17-Dec-2018.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → ∩ ∩ 〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | iunpw 4512* | An indexed union of a power class in terms of the power class of the union of its index. Part of Exercise 24(b) of [Enderton] p. 33. (Contributed by NM, 29-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = ∪ 𝐴 ↔ 𝒫 ∪ 𝐴 = ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝒫 𝑥) | ||
Theorem | ifelpwung 4513 | Existence of a conditional class, quantitative version (closed form). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → if(𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) ∈ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | ifelpwund 4514 | Existence of a conditional class, quantitative version (deduction form). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → if(𝜓, 𝐴, 𝐵) ∈ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | ifelpwun 4515 | Existence of a conditional class, quantitative version (inference form). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ if(𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) ∈ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | ifexd 4516 | Existence of a conditional class (deduction form). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → if(𝜓, 𝐴, 𝐵) ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | ifexg 4517 | Existence of the conditional operator (closed form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 1-Sep-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → if(𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | ifex 4518 | Existence of the conditional operator (inference form). (Contributed by NM, 2-Sep-2004.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ if(𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) ∈ V | ||
Theorem | ordon 4519 | The class of all ordinal numbers is ordinal. Proposition 7.12 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 38, but without using the Axiom of Regularity. (Contributed by NM, 17-May-1994.) |
⊢ Ord On | ||
Theorem | ssorduni 4520 | The union of a class of ordinal numbers is ordinal. Proposition 7.19 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 40. (Contributed by NM, 30-May-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ On → Ord ∪ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | ssonuni 4521 | The union of a set of ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. Theorem 9 of [Suppes] p. 132. (Contributed by NM, 1-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ⊆ On → ∪ 𝐴 ∈ On)) | ||
Theorem | ssonunii 4522 | The union of a set of ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. Corollary 7N(d) of [Enderton] p. 193. (Contributed by NM, 20-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ On → ∪ 𝐴 ∈ On) | ||
Theorem | onun2 4523 | The union of two ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 25-Jul-2019.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∈ On) | ||
Theorem | onun2i 4524 | The union of two ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jun-1994.) (Constructive proof by Jim Kingdon, 25-Jul-2019.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ On & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ On ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∈ On | ||
Theorem | ordsson 4525 | Any ordinal class is a subclass of the class of ordinal numbers. Corollary 7.15 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 38. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-1994.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → 𝐴 ⊆ On) | ||
Theorem | onss 4526 | An ordinal number is a subset of the class of ordinal numbers. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → 𝐴 ⊆ On) | ||
Theorem | onuni 4527 | The union of an ordinal number is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 29-Sep-2006.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → ∪ 𝐴 ∈ On) | ||
Theorem | orduni 4528 | The union of an ordinal class is ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 12-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → Ord ∪ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | bm2.5ii 4529* | Problem 2.5(ii) of [BellMachover] p. 471. (Contributed by NM, 20-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ On → ∪ 𝐴 = ∩ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑦 ⊆ 𝑥}) | ||
Theorem | sucexb 4530 | A successor exists iff its class argument exists. (Contributed by NM, 22-Jun-1998.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ V ↔ suc 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | sucexg 4531 | The successor of a set is a set (generalization). (Contributed by NM, 5-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → suc 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | sucex 4532 | The successor of a set is a set. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ suc 𝐴 ∈ V | ||
Theorem | ordsucim 4533 | The successor of an ordinal class is ordinal. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 8-Nov-2018.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → Ord suc 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | onsuc 4534 | The successor of an ordinal number is an ordinal number. Closed form of onsuci 4549. Forward implication of onsucb 4536. Proposition 7.24 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 41. (Contributed by NM, 6-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → suc 𝐴 ∈ On) | ||
Theorem | ordsucg 4535 | The successor of an ordinal class is ordinal. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 20-Nov-2018.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ V → (Ord 𝐴 ↔ Ord suc 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | onsucb 4536 | A class is an ordinal number if and only if its successor is an ordinal number. Biconditional form of onsuc 4534. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On ↔ suc 𝐴 ∈ On) | ||
Theorem | ordsucss 4537 | The successor of an element of an ordinal class is a subset of it. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1998.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐵 → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → suc 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | ordelsuc 4538 | A set belongs to an ordinal iff its successor is a subset of the ordinal. Exercise 8 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 42 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 29-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ Ord 𝐵) → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ suc 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | onsucssi 4539 | A set belongs to an ordinal number iff its successor is a subset of the ordinal number. Exercise 8 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 42 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 16-Sep-1995.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ On & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ On ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ suc 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | onsucmin 4540* | The successor of an ordinal number is the smallest larger ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 28-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → suc 𝐴 = ∩ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑥}) | ||
Theorem | onsucelsucr 4541 | Membership is inherited by predecessors. The converse, for all ordinals, implies excluded middle, as shown at onsucelsucexmid 4563. However, the converse does hold where 𝐵 is a natural number, as seen at nnsucelsuc 6546. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 17-Jul-2019.) |
⊢ (𝐵 ∈ On → (suc 𝐴 ∈ suc 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | onsucsssucr 4542 | The subclass relationship between two ordinals is inherited by their predecessors. The converse implies excluded middle, as shown at onsucsssucexmid 4560. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 29-Jul-2019.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ Ord 𝐵) → (suc 𝐴 ⊆ suc 𝐵 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | sucunielr 4543 | Successor and union. The converse (where 𝐵 is an ordinal) implies excluded middle, as seen at ordsucunielexmid 4564. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.) |
⊢ (suc 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ ∪ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | unon 4544 | The class of all ordinal numbers is its own union. Exercise 11 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 40. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ ∪ On = On | ||
Theorem | onuniss2 4545* | The union of the ordinal subsets of an ordinal number is that number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → ∪ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴} = 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | limon 4546 | The class of ordinal numbers is a limit ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 24-Mar-1995.) |
⊢ Lim On | ||
Theorem | ordunisuc2r 4547* | An ordinal which contains the successor of each of its members is equal to its union. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 14-Nov-2018.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐴 = ∪ 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | onssi 4548 | An ordinal number is a subset of On. (Contributed by NM, 11-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ On ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ On | ||
Theorem | onsuci 4549 | The successor of an ordinal number is an ordinal number. Inference associated with onsuc 4534 and onsucb 4536. Corollary 7N(c) of [Enderton] p. 193. (Contributed by NM, 12-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ On ⇒ ⊢ suc 𝐴 ∈ On | ||
Theorem | onintonm 4550* | The intersection of an inhabited collection of ordinal numbers is an ordinal number. Compare Exercise 6 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 44. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 30-Aug-2021.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ On ∧ ∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → ∩ 𝐴 ∈ On) | ||
Theorem | onintrab2im 4551 | An existence condition which implies an intersection is an ordinal number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Aug-2021.) |
⊢ (∃𝑥 ∈ On 𝜑 → ∩ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝜑} ∈ On) | ||
Theorem | ordtriexmidlem 4552 | Lemma for decidability and ordinals. The set {𝑥 ∈ {∅} ∣ 𝜑} is a way of connecting statements about ordinals (such as trichotomy in ordtriexmid 4554 or weak linearity in ordsoexmid 4595) with a proposition 𝜑. Our lemma states that it is an ordinal number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jan-2019.) |
⊢ {𝑥 ∈ {∅} ∣ 𝜑} ∈ On | ||
Theorem | ordtriexmidlem2 4553* | Lemma for decidability and ordinals. The set {𝑥 ∈ {∅} ∣ 𝜑} is a way of connecting statements about ordinals (such as trichotomy in ordtriexmid 4554 or weak linearity in ordsoexmid 4595) with a proposition 𝜑. Our lemma helps connect that set to excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jan-2019.) |
⊢ ({𝑥 ∈ {∅} ∣ 𝜑} = ∅ → ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | ordtriexmid 4554* |
Ordinal trichotomy implies the law of the excluded middle (that is,
decidability of an arbitrary proposition).
This theorem is stated in "Constructive ordinals", [Crosilla], p. "Set-theoretic principles incompatible with intuitionistic logic". Also see exmidontri 7301 which is much the same theorem but biconditionalized and using the EXMID notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 14-Nov-2018.) |
⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ On ∀𝑦 ∈ On (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∨ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | ontriexmidim 4555* | Ordinal trichotomy implies excluded middle. Closed form of ordtriexmid 4554. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 26-Aug-2024.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ On ∀𝑦 ∈ On (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∨ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥) → DECID 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | ordtri2orexmid 4556* | Ordinal trichotomy implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 31-Jul-2019.) |
⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ On ∀𝑦 ∈ On (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦 ⊆ 𝑥) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | 2ordpr 4557 | Version of 2on 6480 with the definition of 2o expanded and expressed in terms of Ord. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2021.) |
⊢ Ord {∅, {∅}} | ||
Theorem | ontr2exmid 4558* | An ordinal transitivity law which implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 17-Sep-2021.) |
⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ On ∀𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ On ((𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | ordtri2or2exmidlem 4559* | A set which is 2o if 𝜑 or ∅ if ¬ 𝜑 is an ordinal. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2021.) |
⊢ {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ 𝜑} ∈ On | ||
Theorem | onsucsssucexmid 4560* | The converse of onsucsssucr 4542 implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 29-Jul-2019.) |
⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ On ∀𝑦 ∈ On (𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 → suc 𝑥 ⊆ suc 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | onsucelsucexmidlem1 4561* | Lemma for onsucelsucexmid 4563. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.) |
⊢ ∅ ∈ {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)} | ||
Theorem | onsucelsucexmidlem 4562* | Lemma for onsucelsucexmid 4563. The set {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)} appears as 𝐴 in the proof of Theorem 1.3 in [Bauer] p. 483 (see acexmidlema 5910), and similar sets also appear in other proofs that various propositions imply excluded middle, for example in ordtriexmidlem 4552. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.) |
⊢ {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)} ∈ On | ||
Theorem | onsucelsucexmid 4563* | The converse of onsucelsucr 4541 implies excluded middle. On the other hand, if 𝑦 is constrained to be a natural number, instead of an arbitrary ordinal, then the converse of onsucelsucr 4541 does hold, as seen at nnsucelsuc 6546. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.) |
⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ On ∀𝑦 ∈ On (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → suc 𝑥 ∈ suc 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | ordsucunielexmid 4564* | The converse of sucunielr 4543 (where 𝐵 is an ordinal) implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Aug-2019.) |
⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ On ∀𝑦 ∈ On (𝑥 ∈ ∪ 𝑦 → suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | regexmidlemm 4565* | Lemma for regexmid 4568. 𝐴 is inhabited. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ (𝑥 = ∅ ∧ 𝜑))} ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | regexmidlem1 4566* | Lemma for regexmid 4568. If 𝐴 has a minimal element, excluded middle follows. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ (𝑥 = ∅ ∧ 𝜑))} ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | reg2exmidlema 4567* | Lemma for reg2exmid 4569. If 𝐴 has a minimal element (expressed by ⊆), excluded middle follows. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Oct-2021.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ (𝑥 = ∅ ∧ 𝜑))} ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝐴 𝑢 ⊆ 𝑣 → (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | regexmid 4568* |
The axiom of foundation implies excluded middle.
By foundation (or regularity), we mean the principle that every inhabited set has an element which is minimal (when arranged by ∈). The statement of foundation here is taken from Metamath Proof Explorer's ax-reg, and is identical (modulo one unnecessary quantifier) to the statement of foundation in Theorem "Foundation implies instances of EM" of [Crosilla], p. "Set-theoretic principles incompatible with intuitionistic logic". For this reason, IZF does not adopt foundation as an axiom and instead replaces it with ax-setind 4570. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ (∃𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → ∃𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | reg2exmid 4569* | If any inhabited set has a minimal element (when expressed by ⊆), excluded middle follows. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 2-Oct-2021.) |
⊢ ∀𝑧(∃𝑤 𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Axiom | ax-setind 4570* |
Axiom of ∈-Induction (also known as set
induction). An axiom of
Intuitionistic Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. Axiom 9 of [Crosilla] p.
"Axioms of CZF and IZF". This replaces the Axiom of
Foundation (also
called Regularity) from Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory.
For more on axioms which might be adopted which are incompatible with this axiom (that is, Non-wellfounded Set Theory but in the absence of excluded middle), see Chapter 20 of [AczelRathjen], p. 183. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 19-Oct-2018.) |
⊢ (∀𝑎(∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑎 [𝑦 / 𝑎]𝜑 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑎𝜑) | ||
Theorem | setindel 4571* | ∈-Induction in terms of membership in a class. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 22-Oct-2018.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥(∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑆) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑆) → 𝑆 = V) | ||
Theorem | setind 4572* | Set (epsilon) induction. Theorem 5.22 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 21. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐴 = V) | ||
Theorem | setind2 4573 | Set (epsilon) induction, stated compactly. Given as a homework problem in 1992 by George Boolos (1940-1996). (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ (𝒫 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐴 → 𝐴 = V) | ||
Theorem | elirr 4574 |
No class is a member of itself. Exercise 6 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22.
The reason that this theorem is marked as discouraged is a bit subtle. If we wanted to reduce usage of ax-setind 4570, we could redefine Ord 𝐴 (df-iord 4398) to also require E Fr 𝐴 (df-frind 4364) and in that case any theorem related to irreflexivity of ordinals could use ordirr 4575 (which under that definition would presumably not need ax-setind 4570 to prove it). But since ordinals have not yet been defined that way, we cannot rely on the "don't add additional axiom use" feature of the minimizer to get theorems to use ordirr 4575. To encourage ordirr 4575 when possible, we mark this theorem as discouraged. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Proof rewritten by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 26-Nov-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | ordirr 4575 | Epsilon irreflexivity of ordinals: no ordinal class is a member of itself. Theorem 2.2(i) of [BellMachover] p. 469, generalized to classes. The present proof requires ax-setind 4570. If in the definition of ordinals df-iord 4398, we also required that membership be well-founded on any ordinal (see df-frind 4364), then we could prove ordirr 4575 without ax-setind 4570. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-1994.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | onirri 4576 | An ordinal number is not a member of itself. Theorem 7M(c) of [Enderton] p. 192. (Contributed by NM, 11-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ On ⇒ ⊢ ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | nordeq 4577 | A member of an ordinal class is not equal to it. (Contributed by NM, 25-May-1998.) |
⊢ ((Ord 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | ordn2lp 4578 | An ordinal class cannot be an element of one of its members. Variant of first part of Theorem 2.2(vii) of [BellMachover] p. 469. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → ¬ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | orddisj 4579 | An ordinal class and its singleton are disjoint. (Contributed by NM, 19-May-1998.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → (𝐴 ∩ {𝐴}) = ∅) | ||
Theorem | orddif 4580 | Ordinal derived from its successor. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-1998.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → 𝐴 = (suc 𝐴 ∖ {𝐴})) | ||
Theorem | elirrv 4581 | The membership relation is irreflexive: no set is a member of itself. Theorem 105 of [Suppes] p. 54. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
Theorem | sucprcreg 4582 | A class is equal to its successor iff it is a proper class (assuming the Axiom of Set Induction). (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2004.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝐴 ∈ V ↔ suc 𝐴 = 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | ruv 4583 | The Russell class is equal to the universe V. Exercise 5 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 4-Oct-2008.) |
⊢ {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} = V | ||
Theorem | ruALT 4584 | Alternate proof of Russell's Paradox ru 2985, simplified using (indirectly) the Axiom of Set Induction ax-setind 4570. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 4-Oct-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} ∉ V | ||
Theorem | onprc 4585 | No set contains all ordinal numbers. Proposition 7.13 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 38. This is also known as the Burali-Forti paradox (remark in [Enderton] p. 194). In 1897, Cesare Burali-Forti noticed that since the "set" of all ordinal numbers is an ordinal class (ordon 4519), it must be both an element of the set of all ordinal numbers yet greater than every such element. ZF set theory resolves this paradox by not allowing the class of all ordinal numbers to be a set (so instead it is a proper class). Here we prove the denial of its existence. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-1994.) |
⊢ ¬ On ∈ V | ||
Theorem | sucon 4586 | The class of all ordinal numbers is its own successor. (Contributed by NM, 12-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ suc On = On | ||
Theorem | en2lp 4587 | No class has 2-cycle membership loops. Theorem 7X(b) of [Enderton] p. 206. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.) (Proof rewritten by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 27-Nov-2018.) |
⊢ ¬ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | preleq 4588 | Equality of two unordered pairs when one member of each pair contains the other member. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐶 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐷 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ {𝐴, 𝐵} = {𝐶, 𝐷}) → (𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | opthreg 4589 | Theorem for alternate representation of ordered pairs, requiring the Axiom of Set Induction ax-setind 4570 (via the preleq 4588 step). See df-op 3628 for a description of other ordered pair representations. Exercise 34 of [Enderton] p. 207. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐶 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐷 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ({𝐴, {𝐴, 𝐵}} = {𝐶, {𝐶, 𝐷}} ↔ (𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | suc11g 4590 | The successor operation behaves like a one-to-one function (assuming the Axiom of Set Induction). Similar to Exercise 35 of [Enderton] p. 208 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2003.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (suc 𝐴 = suc 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | suc11 4591 | The successor operation behaves like a one-to-one function. Compare Exercise 16 of [Enderton] p. 194. (Contributed by NM, 3-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → (suc 𝐴 = suc 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | dtruex 4592* | At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). Although dtruarb 4221 can also be summarized as "at least two sets exist", the difference is that dtruarb 4221 shows the existence of two sets which are not equal to each other, but this theorem says that given a specific 𝑦, we can construct a set 𝑥 which does not equal it. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2018.) |
⊢ ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
Theorem | dtru 4593* | At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). If we assumed the law of the excluded middle this would be equivalent to dtruex 4592. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2018.) |
⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
Theorem | eunex 4594 | Existential uniqueness implies there is a value for which the wff argument is false. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2018.) |
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | ordsoexmid 4595 | Weak linearity of ordinals implies the law of the excluded middle (that is, decidability of an arbitrary proposition). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 29-Jan-2019.) |
⊢ E Or On ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | ordsuc 4596 | The successor of an ordinal class is ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1995.) (Constructive proof by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 20-Jul-2019.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 ↔ Ord suc 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | onsucuni2 4597 | A successor ordinal is the successor of its union. (Contributed by NM, 10-Dec-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 27-Aug-2011.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐴 = suc 𝐵) → suc ∪ 𝐴 = 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | 0elsucexmid 4598* | If the successor of any ordinal class contains the empty set, excluded middle follows. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Sep-2021.) |
⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ On ∅ ∈ suc 𝑥 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | nlimsucg 4599 | A successor is not a limit ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 25-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 27-Aug-2011.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ¬ Lim suc 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | ordpwsucss 4600 |
The collection of ordinals in the power class of an ordinal is a
superset of its successor.
We can think of (𝒫 𝐴 ∩ On) as another possible definition of successor, which would be equivalent to df-suc 4403 given excluded middle. It is an ordinal, and has some successor-like properties. For example, if 𝐴 ∈ On then both ∪ suc 𝐴 = 𝐴 (onunisuci 4464) and ∪ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴} = 𝐴 (onuniss2 4545). Constructively (𝒫 𝐴 ∩ On) and suc 𝐴 cannot be shown to be equivalent (as proved at ordpwsucexmid 4603). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Jul-2019.) |
⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → suc 𝐴 ⊆ (𝒫 𝐴 ∩ On)) |
< Previous Next > |
Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |