| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 48 of 172) | < 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 | opthreg 4701 | Theorem for alternate representation of ordered pairs, requiring the Axiom of Set Induction ax-setind 4682 (via the preleq 4700 step). See df-op 3717 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 4702 | 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 4703 | 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 4704* | At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). Although dtruarb 4326 can also be summarized as "at least two sets exist", the difference is that dtruarb 4326 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 4705* | 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 4704. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Dec-2018.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | eunex 4706 | 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 4707 | 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 4708 | 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 4709 | 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 4710* | 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 4711 | 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 4712 |
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 4514 given excluded middle. It is an ordinal, and has some successor-like properties. For example, if 𝐴 ∈ On then both ∪ suc 𝐴 = 𝐴 (onunisuci 4575) and ∪ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴} = 𝐴 (onuniss2 4657). Constructively (𝒫 𝐴 ∩ On) and suc 𝐴 cannot be shown to be equivalent (as proved at ordpwsucexmid 4715). (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 21-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → suc 𝐴 ⊆ (𝒫 𝐴 ∩ On)) | ||
| Theorem | onnmin 4713 | No member of a set of ordinal numbers belongs to its minimum. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-1997.) (Constructive proof by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 21-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵 ∈ ∩ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | ssnel 4714 | Relationship between subset and elementhood. In the context of ordinals this can be seen as an ordering law. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 22-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → ¬ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | ordpwsucexmid 4715* | The subset in ordpwsucss 4712 cannot be equality. That is, strengthening it to equality implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ On suc 𝑥 = (𝒫 𝑥 ∩ On) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | ordtri2or2exmid 4716* | Ordinal trichotomy implies excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ On ∀𝑦 ∈ On (𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦 ⊆ 𝑥) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | ontri2orexmidim 4717* | Ordinal trichotomy implies excluded middle. Closed form of ordtri2or2exmid 4716. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 26-Aug-2024.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ On ∀𝑦 ∈ On (𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦 ⊆ 𝑥) → DECID 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | onintexmid 4718* | If the intersection (infimum) of an inhabited class of ordinal numbers belongs to the class, excluded middle follows. The hypothesis would be provable given excluded middle. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro and Jim Kingdon, 29-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑦 ⊆ On ∧ ∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦) → ∩ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | zfregfr 4719 | The epsilon relation is well-founded on any class. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.) |
| ⊢ E Fr 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | ordfr 4720 | Epsilon is well-founded on an ordinal class. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → E Fr 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | ordwe 4721 | Epsilon well-orders every ordinal. Proposition 7.4 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 36. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → E We 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | wetriext 4722* | A trichotomous well-order is extensional. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 26-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 We 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑎 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑏 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑎𝑅𝑏 ∨ 𝑎 = 𝑏 ∨ 𝑏𝑅𝑎)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑧𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝑧𝑅𝐶)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | wessep 4723 | A subset of a set well-ordered by set membership is well-ordered by set membership. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 30-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (( E We 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴) → E We 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | reg3exmidlemwe 4724* | Lemma for reg3exmid 4725. Our counterexample 𝐴 satisfies We. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Oct-2021.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ (𝑥 = ∅ ∧ 𝜑))} ⇒ ⊢ E We 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | reg3exmid 4725* | If any inhabited set satisfying df-wetr 4477 for E has a minimal element, excluded middle follows. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Oct-2021.) |
| ⊢ (( E We 𝑧 ∧ ∃𝑤 𝑤 ∈ 𝑧) → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | dcextest 4726* | If it is decidable whether {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} is a set, then ¬ 𝜑 is decidable (where 𝑥 does not occur in 𝜑). From this fact, we can deduce (outside the formal system, since we cannot quantify over classes) that if it is decidable whether any class is a set, then "weak excluded middle" (that is, any negated proposition ¬ 𝜑 is decidable) holds. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 3-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ DECID {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ DECID ¬ 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | tfi 4727* |
The Principle of Transfinite Induction. Theorem 7.17 of [TakeutiZaring]
p. 39. This principle states that if 𝐴 is a class of ordinal
numbers with the property that every ordinal number included in 𝐴
also belongs to 𝐴, then every ordinal number is in
𝐴.
(Contributed by NM, 18-Feb-2004.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ On ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ On (𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) → 𝐴 = On) | ||
| Theorem | tfis 4728* | Transfinite Induction Schema. If all ordinal numbers less than a given number 𝑥 have a property (induction hypothesis), then all ordinal numbers have the property (conclusion). Exercise 25 of [Enderton] p. 200. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 20-Nov-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ On → (∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ On → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | tfis2f 4729* | Transfinite Induction Schema, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ On → (∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝜓 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ On → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | tfis2 4730* | Transfinite Induction Schema, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ On → (∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝜓 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ On → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | tfis3 4731* | Transfinite Induction Schema, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ On → (∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝜓 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | tfisi 4732* | A transfinite induction scheme in "implicit" form where the induction is done on an object derived from the object of interest. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 24-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ On) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑅 ∈ On ∧ 𝑅 ⊆ 𝑇) ∧ ∀𝑦(𝑆 ∈ 𝑅 → 𝜒)) → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑅 = 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝑅 = 𝑇) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
| Axiom | ax-iinf 4733* | Axiom of Infinity. Axiom 5 of [Crosilla] p. "Axioms of CZF and IZF". (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 16-Nov-2018.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(∅ ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → suc 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | zfinf2 4734* | A standard version of the Axiom of Infinity, using definitions to abbreviate. Axiom Inf of [BellMachover] p. 472. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(∅ ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 suc 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥) | ||
| Syntax | com 4735 | Extend class notation to include the class of natural numbers. |
| class ω | ||
| Definition | df-iom 4736* |
Define the class of natural numbers as the smallest inductive set, which
is valid provided we assume the Axiom of Infinity. Definition 6.3 of
[Eisenberg] p. 82.
Note: the natural numbers ω are a subset of the ordinal numbers df-on 4511. Later, when we define complex numbers, we will be able to also define a subset of the complex numbers (df-inn 9288) with analogous properties and operations, but they will be different sets. We are unable to use the terms finite ordinal and natural number interchangeably, as shown at exmidonfin 7540. (Contributed by NM, 6-Aug-1994.) Use its alias dfom3 4737 instead for naming consistency with set.mm. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ω = ∩ {𝑥 ∣ (∅ ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 suc 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)} | ||
| Theorem | dfom3 4737* | Alias for df-iom 4736. Use it instead of df-iom 4736 for naming consistency with set.mm. (Contributed by NM, 6-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ ω = ∩ {𝑥 ∣ (∅ ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 suc 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)} | ||
| Theorem | omex 4738 | The existence of omega (the class of natural numbers). Axiom 7 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 43. (Contributed by NM, 6-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ ω ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | peano1 4739 | Zero is a natural number. One of Peano's five postulates for arithmetic. Proposition 7.30(1) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 42. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ ∅ ∈ ω | ||
| Theorem | peano2 4740 | The successor of any natural number is a natural number. One of Peano's five postulates for arithmetic. Proposition 7.30(2) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 42. (Contributed by NM, 3-Sep-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → suc 𝐴 ∈ ω) | ||
| Theorem | peano3 4741 | The successor of any natural number is not zero. One of Peano's five postulates for arithmetic. Proposition 7.30(3) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 42. (Contributed by NM, 3-Sep-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → suc 𝐴 ≠ ∅) | ||
| Theorem | peano4 4742 | Two natural numbers are equal iff their successors are equal, i.e. the successor function is one-to-one. One of Peano's five postulates for arithmetic. Proposition 7.30(4) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 43. (Contributed by NM, 3-Sep-2003.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω) → (suc 𝐴 = suc 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | peano5 4743* | The induction postulate: any class containing zero and closed under the successor operation contains all natural numbers. One of Peano's five postulates for arithmetic. Proposition 7.30(5) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 43. The more traditional statement of mathematical induction as a theorem schema, with a basis and an induction step, is derived from this theorem as Theorem findes 4748. (Contributed by NM, 18-Feb-2004.) |
| ⊢ ((∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ ω (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) → ω ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | find 4744* | The Principle of Finite Induction (mathematical induction). Corollary 7.31 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 43. The simpler hypothesis shown here was suggested in an email from "Colin" on 1-Oct-2001. The hypothesis states that 𝐴 is a set of natural numbers, zero belongs to 𝐴, and given any member of 𝐴 the member's successor also belongs to 𝐴. The conclusion is that every natural number is in 𝐴. (Contributed by NM, 22-Feb-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 27-Aug-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ ω ∧ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 = ω | ||
| Theorem | finds 4745* | Principle of Finite Induction (inference schema), using implicit substitutions. The first four hypotheses establish the substitutions we need. The last two are the basis and the induction step. Theorem Schema 22 of [Suppes] p. 136. This is Metamath 100 proof #74. (Contributed by NM, 14-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = ∅ → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = suc 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜏)) & ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑦 ∈ ω → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | finds2 4746* | Principle of Finite Induction (inference schema), using implicit substitutions. The first three hypotheses establish the substitutions we need. The last two are the basis and the induction step. Theorem Schema 22 of [Suppes] p. 136. (Contributed by NM, 29-Nov-2002.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = ∅ → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = suc 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜏 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑦 ∈ ω → (𝜏 → (𝜒 → 𝜃))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ ω → (𝜏 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | finds1 4747* | Principle of Finite Induction (inference schema), using implicit substitutions. The first three hypotheses establish the substitutions we need. The last two are the basis and the induction step. Theorem Schema 22 of [Suppes] p. 136. (Contributed by NM, 22-Mar-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = ∅ → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = suc 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑦 ∈ ω → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ ω → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | findes 4748 | Finite induction with explicit substitution. The first hypothesis is the basis and the second is the induction step. Theorem Schema 22 of [Suppes] p. 136. This is an alternative for Metamath 100 proof #74. (Contributed by Raph Levien, 9-Jul-2003.) |
| ⊢ [∅ / 𝑥]𝜑 & ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ ω → (𝜑 → [suc 𝑥 / 𝑥]𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ ω → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | nn0suc 4749* | A natural number is either 0 or a successor. Similar theorems for arbitrary sets or real numbers will not be provable (without the law of the excluded middle), but equality of natural numbers is decidable. (Contributed by NM, 27-May-1998.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐴 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑥 ∈ ω 𝐴 = suc 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | elomssom 4750 | A natural number ordinal is, as a set, included in the set of natural number ordinals. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1998.) Extract this result from the previous proof of elnn 4751. (Revised by BJ, 7-Aug-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → 𝐴 ⊆ ω) | ||
| Theorem | elnn 4751 | A member of a natural number is a natural number. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1998.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω) → 𝐴 ∈ ω) | ||
| Theorem | ordom 4752 | Omega is ordinal. Theorem 7.32 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 43. (Contributed by NM, 18-Oct-1995.) |
| ⊢ Ord ω | ||
| Theorem | omelon2 4753 | Omega is an ordinal number. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 30-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ (ω ∈ V → ω ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | omelon 4754 | Omega is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 10-May-1998.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 30-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ ω ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | nnon 4755 | A natural number is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 27-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → 𝐴 ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | nnoni 4756 | A natural number is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 27-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ ω ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | nnord 4757 | A natural number is ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 17-Oct-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → Ord 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | omsson 4758 | Omega is a subset of On. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ ω ⊆ On | ||
| Theorem | limom 4759 | Omega is a limit ordinal. Theorem 2.8 of [BellMachover] p. 473. (Contributed by NM, 26-Mar-1995.) (Proof rewritten by Jim Kingdon, 5-Jan-2019.) |
| ⊢ Lim ω | ||
| Theorem | peano2b 4760 | A class belongs to omega iff its successor does. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω ↔ suc 𝐴 ∈ ω) | ||
| Theorem | nnsuc 4761* | A nonzero natural number is a successor. (Contributed by NM, 18-Feb-2004.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐴 ≠ ∅) → ∃𝑥 ∈ ω 𝐴 = suc 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | nnsucpred 4762 | The successor of the precedessor of a nonzero natural number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 31-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐴 ≠ ∅) → suc ∪ 𝐴 = 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | nndceq0 4763 | A natural number is either zero or nonzero. Decidable equality for natural numbers is a special case of the law of the excluded middle which holds in most constructive set theories including ours. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-Jan-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → DECID 𝐴 = ∅) | ||
| Theorem | 0elnn 4764 | A natural number is either the empty set or has the empty set as an element. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 23-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐴 = ∅ ∨ ∅ ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | nn0eln0 4765 | A natural number is nonempty iff it contains the empty set. Although in constructive mathematics it is generally more natural to work with inhabited sets and ignore the whole concept of nonempty sets, in the specific case of natural numbers this theorem may be helpful in converting proofs which were written assuming excluded middle. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → (∅ ∈ 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 ≠ ∅)) | ||
| Theorem | nnregexmid 4766* | If inhabited sets of natural numbers always have minimal elements, excluded middle follows. The argument is essentially the same as regexmid 4680 and the larger lesson is that although natural numbers may behave "non-constructively" even in a constructive set theory (for example see nndceq 6766 or nntri3or 6760), sets of natural numbers are a different animal. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Sep-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 ⊆ ω ∧ ∃𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥) → ∃𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | omsinds 4767* | Strong (or "total") induction principle over ω. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Jul-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ ω → (∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝜓 → 𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | nnpredcl 4768 | The predecessor of a natural number is a natural number. This theorem is most interesting when the natural number is a successor (as seen in theorems like onsucuni2 4709) but also holds when it is ∅ by uni0 3960. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 31-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → ∪ 𝐴 ∈ ω) | ||
| Theorem | nnpredlt 4769 | The predecessor (see nnpredcl 4768) of a nonzero natural number is less than (see df-iord 4509) that number. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 14-Sep-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐴 ≠ ∅) → ∪ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Syntax | cxp 4770 | Extend the definition of a class to include the cross product. |
| class (𝐴 × 𝐵) | ||
| Syntax | ccnv 4771 | Extend the definition of a class to include the converse of a class. |
| class ◡𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | cdm 4772 | Extend the definition of a class to include the domain of a class. |
| class dom 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | crn 4773 | Extend the definition of a class to include the range of a class. |
| class ran 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | cres 4774 | Extend the definition of a class to include the restriction of a class. (Read: The restriction of 𝐴 to 𝐵.) |
| class (𝐴 ↾ 𝐵) | ||
| Syntax | cima 4775 | Extend the definition of a class to include the image of a class. (Read: The image of 𝐵 under 𝐴.) |
| class (𝐴 “ 𝐵) | ||
| Syntax | ccom 4776 | Extend the definition of a class to include the composition of two classes. (Read: The composition of 𝐴 and 𝐵.) |
| class (𝐴 ∘ 𝐵) | ||
| Syntax | wrel 4777 | Extend the definition of a wff to include the relation predicate. (Read: 𝐴 is a relation.) |
| wff Rel 𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-xp 4778* | Define the Cartesian product of two classes. This is also sometimes called the "cross product" but that term also has other meanings; we intentionally choose a less ambiguous term. Definition 9.11 of [Quine] p. 64. For example, ({1, 5} × {2, 7}) = ({〈1, 2〉, 〈1, 7〉} ∪ {〈5, 2〉, 〈5, 7〉}). Another example is that the set of rational numbers is defined using the Cartesian product as (ℤ × ℕ); the left- and right-hand sides of the Cartesian product represent the top (integer) and bottom (natural) numbers of a fraction. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 × 𝐵) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵)} | ||
| Definition | df-rel 4779 | Define the relation predicate. Definition 6.4(1) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 23. For alternate definitions, see dfrel2 5236 and dfrel3 5243. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Rel 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ (V × V)) | ||
| Definition | df-cnv 4780* |
Define the converse of a class. Definition 9.12 of [Quine] p. 64. The
converse of a binary relation swaps its arguments, i.e., if 𝐴 ∈
V
and 𝐵 ∈ V then (𝐴◡𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝐵𝑅𝐴), as proven in brcnv 4961
(see df-br 4129 and df-rel 4779 for more on relations). For example,
◡{〈2,
6〉, 〈3, 9〉} = {〈6, 2〉, 〈9, 3〉}.
We use Quine's breve accent (smile) notation. Like Quine, we use it as a prefix, which eliminates the need for parentheses. "Converse" is Quine's terminology. Some authors use a "minus one" exponent and call it "inverse", especially when the argument is a function, although this is not in general a genuine inverse. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-1994.) |
| ⊢ ◡𝐴 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑦𝐴𝑥} | ||
| Definition | df-co 4781* | Define the composition of two classes. Definition 6.6(3) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 24. Note that Definition 7 of [Suppes] p. 63 reverses 𝐴 and 𝐵, uses a slash instead of ∘, and calls the operation "relative product". (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∘ 𝐵) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧(𝑥𝐵𝑧 ∧ 𝑧𝐴𝑦)} | ||
| Definition | df-dm 4782* | Define the domain of a class. Definition 3 of [Suppes] p. 59. For example, F = { 〈 2 , 6 〉, 〈 3 , 9 〉 } → dom F = { 2 , 3 } . Contrast with range (defined in df-rn 4783). For alternate definitions see dfdm2 5320, dfdm3 4965, and dfdm4 4971. The notation "dom " is used by Enderton; other authors sometimes use script D. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ dom 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∣ ∃𝑦 𝑥𝐴𝑦} | ||
| Definition | df-rn 4783 | Define the range of a class. For example, F = { 〈 2 , 6 〉, 〈 3 , 9 〉 } -> ran F = { 6 , 9 } . Contrast with domain (defined in df-dm 4782). For alternate definitions, see dfrn2 4966, dfrn3 4967, and dfrn4 5246. The notation "ran " is used by Enderton; other authors sometimes use script R or script W. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ ran 𝐴 = dom ◡𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-res 4784 | Define the restriction of a class. Definition 6.6(1) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 24. For example, (𝐹 = {〈2, 6〉, 〈3, 9〉} ∧ 𝐵 = {1, 2}) → (𝐹 ↾ 𝐵) = {〈2, 6〉}. We do not introduce a special syntax for the corestriction of a class: it will be expressed either as the intersection (𝐴 ∩ (V × 𝐵)) or as the converse of the restricted converse. (Contributed by NM, 2-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ↾ 𝐵) = (𝐴 ∩ (𝐵 × V)) | ||
| Definition | df-ima 4785 | Define the image of a class (as restricted by another class). Definition 6.6(2) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 24. For example, ( F = { 〈 2 , 6 〉, 〈 3 , 9 〉 } /\ B = { 1 , 2 } ) -> ( F “ B ) = { 6 } . Contrast with restriction (df-res 4784) and range (df-rn 4783). For an alternate definition, see dfima2 5126. (Contributed by NM, 2-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 “ 𝐵) = ran (𝐴 ↾ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | xpeq1 4786 | Equality theorem for cross product. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐴 × 𝐶) = (𝐵 × 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | xpeq2 4787 | Equality theorem for cross product. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jul-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐶 × 𝐴) = (𝐶 × 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | elxpi 4788* | Membership in a cross product. Uses fewer axioms than elxp 4789. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (𝐵 × 𝐶) → ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝐴 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶))) | ||
| Theorem | elxp 4789* | Membership in a cross product. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (𝐵 × 𝐶) ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝐴 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶))) | ||
| Theorem | elxp2 4790* | Membership in a cross product. (Contributed by NM, 23-Feb-2004.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (𝐵 × 𝐶) ↔ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝐴 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉) | ||
| Theorem | xpeq12 4791 | Equality theorem for cross product. (Contributed by FL, 31-Aug-2009.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 = 𝐷) → (𝐴 × 𝐶) = (𝐵 × 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | xpeq1i 4792 | Equality inference for cross product. (Contributed by NM, 21-Dec-2008.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 × 𝐶) = (𝐵 × 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | xpeq2i 4793 | Equality inference for cross product. (Contributed by NM, 21-Dec-2008.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐶 × 𝐴) = (𝐶 × 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | xpeq12i 4794 | Equality inference for cross product. (Contributed by FL, 31-Aug-2009.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 & ⊢ 𝐶 = 𝐷 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 × 𝐶) = (𝐵 × 𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | xpeq1d 4795 | Equality deduction for cross product. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 17-Jun-2010.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 × 𝐶) = (𝐵 × 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | xpeq2d 4796 | Equality deduction for cross product. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 17-Jun-2010.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶 × 𝐴) = (𝐶 × 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | xpeq12d 4797 | Equality deduction for Cartesian product. (Contributed by NM, 8-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 × 𝐶) = (𝐵 × 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | sqxpeqd 4798 | Equality deduction for a Cartesian square, see Wikipedia "Cartesian product", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_product#n-ary_Cartesian_power. (Contributed by AV, 13-Jan-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 × 𝐴) = (𝐵 × 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | nfxp 4799 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for cross product. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝐴 × 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | 0nelxp 4800 | The empty set is not a member of a cross product. (Contributed by NM, 2-May-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∅ ∈ (𝐴 × 𝐵) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |