P. 60 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 5901-6000   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	riota2df 5901*	A deduction version of riota2f 5902. (Contributed by NM, 17-Feb-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝐵) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) → (𝜒 ↔ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) = 𝐵))
Theorem	riota2f 5902*	This theorem shows a condition that allows us to represent a descriptor with a class expression 𝐵. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐵 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) → (𝜓 ↔ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = 𝐵))
Theorem	riota2 5903*	This theorem shows a condition that allows us to represent a descriptor with a class expression 𝐵. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 10-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐵 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) → (𝜓 ↔ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = 𝐵))
Theorem	riotaprop 5904*	Properties of a restricted definite description operator. Todo (df-riota 5880 update): can some uses of riota2f 5902 be shortened with this? (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2013.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐵 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	riota5f 5905*	A method for computing restricted iota. (Contributed by NM, 16-Apr-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝐵))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) = 𝐵)
Theorem	riota5 5906*	A method for computing restricted iota. (Contributed by NM, 20-Oct-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝐵))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) = 𝐵)
Theorem	riotass2 5907*	Restriction of a unique element to a smaller class. (Contributed by NM, 21-Aug-2011.) (Revised by NM, 22-Mar-2013.)
⊢ (((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ∧ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓)) → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓))
Theorem	riotass 5908*	Restriction of a unique element to a smaller class. (Contributed by NM, 19-Oct-2005.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑) → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑))
Theorem	moriotass 5909*	Restriction of a unique element to a smaller class. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-2006.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑) → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑))
Theorem	snriota 5910	A restricted class abstraction with a unique member can be expressed as a singleton. (Contributed by NM, 30-May-2006.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} = {(℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)})
Theorem	eusvobj2 5911*	Specify the same property in two ways when class 𝐵(𝑦) is single-valued. (Contributed by NM, 1-Nov-2010.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = 𝐵 → (∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = 𝐵 ↔ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = 𝐵))
Theorem	eusvobj1 5912*	Specify the same object in two ways when class 𝐵(𝑦) is single-valued. (Contributed by NM, 1-Nov-2010.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 19-Nov-2016.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = 𝐵 → (℩𝑥∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = 𝐵) = (℩𝑥∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = 𝐵))
Theorem	f1ofveu 5913*	There is one domain element for each value of a one-to-one onto function. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-2006.)
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴–1-1-onto→𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵) → ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐹‘𝑥) = 𝐶)
Theorem	f1ocnvfv3 5914*	Value of the converse of a one-to-one onto function. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-2006.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.)
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴–1-1-onto→𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵) → (◡𝐹‘𝐶) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐹‘𝑥) = 𝐶))
Theorem	riotaund 5915*	Restricted iota equals the empty set when not meaningful. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2012.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) (Revised by NM, 13-Sep-2018.)
⊢ (¬ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = ∅)
Theorem	acexmidlema 5916*	Lemma for acexmid 5924. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵}    ⇒   ⊢ ({∅} ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜑)
Theorem	acexmidlemb 5917*	Lemma for acexmid 5924. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵}    ⇒   ⊢ (∅ ∈ 𝐵 → 𝜑)
Theorem	acexmidlemph 5918*	Lemma for acexmid 5924. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)
Theorem	acexmidlemab 5919*	Lemma for acexmid 5924. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵}    ⇒   ⊢ (((℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝐴 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢)) = ∅ ∧ (℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐵 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝐵 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢)) = {∅}) → ¬ 𝜑)
Theorem	acexmidlemcase 5920*	Lemma for acexmid 5924. Here we divide the proof into cases (based on the disjunction implicit in an unordered pair, not the sort of case elimination which relies on excluded middle). The cases are (1) the choice function evaluated at 𝐴 equals {∅}, (2) the choice function evaluated at 𝐵 equals ∅, and (3) the choice function evaluated at 𝐴 equals ∅ and the choice function evaluated at 𝐵 equals {∅}. Because of the way we represent the choice function 𝑦, the choice function evaluated at 𝐴 is (℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐴∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦(𝐴 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢)) and the choice function evaluated at 𝐵 is (℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐵∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦(𝐵 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢)). Other than the difference in notation these work just as (𝑦‘𝐴) and (𝑦‘𝐵) would if 𝑦 were a function as defined by df-fun 5261. Although it isn't exactly about the division into cases, it is also convenient for this lemma to also include the step that if the choice function evaluated at 𝐴 equals {∅}, then {∅} ∈ 𝐴 and likewise for 𝐵. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Aug-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵}    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐶 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢) → ({∅} ∈ 𝐴 ∨ ∅ ∈ 𝐵 ∨ ((℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝐴 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢)) = ∅ ∧ (℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐵 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝐵 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢)) = {∅})))
Theorem	acexmidlem1 5921*	Lemma for acexmid 5924. List the cases identified in acexmidlemcase 5920 and hook them up to the lemmas which handle each case. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 7-Aug-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵}    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐶 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢) → (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑))
Theorem	acexmidlem2 5922*	Lemma for acexmid 5924. This builds on acexmidlem1 5921 by noting that every element of 𝐶 is inhabited. (Note that 𝑦 is not quite a function in the df-fun 5261 sense because it uses ordered pairs as described in opthreg 4593 rather than df-op 3632). The set 𝐴 is also found in onsucelsucexmidlem 4566. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 5-Aug-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)}    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵}    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐶 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢) → (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑))
Theorem	acexmidlemv 5923*	Lemma for acexmid 5924. This is acexmid 5924 with additional disjoint variable conditions, most notably between 𝜑 and 𝑥. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑)
Theorem	acexmid 5924*	The axiom of choice implies excluded middle. Theorem 1.3 in [Bauer] p. 483. The statement of the axiom of choice given here is ac2 in the Metamath Proof Explorer (version of 3-Aug-2019). In particular, note that the choice function 𝑦 provides a value when 𝑧 is inhabited (as opposed to nonempty as in some statements of the axiom of choice). Essentially the same proof can also be found at "The axiom of choice implies instances of EM", [Crosilla], p. "Set-theoretic principles incompatible with intuitionistic logic". Often referred to as Diaconescu's theorem, or Diaconescu-Goodman-Myhill theorem, after Radu Diaconescu who discovered it in 1975 in the framework of topos theory and N. D. Goodman and John Myhill in 1978 in the framework of set theory (although it already appeared as an exercise in Errett Bishop's book Foundations of Constructive Analysis from 1967). For this theorem stated using the df-ac 7289 and df-exmid 4229 syntaxes, see exmidac 7292. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 4-Aug-2019.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑)
2.6.11  Operations
Syntax	co 5925	Extend class notation to include the value of an operation 𝐹 (such as + ) for two arguments 𝐴 and 𝐵. Note that the syntax is simply three class symbols in a row surrounded by parentheses. Since operation values are the only possible class expressions consisting of three class expressions in a row surrounded by parentheses, the syntax is unambiguous.
class (𝐴𝐹𝐵)
Syntax	coprab 5926	Extend class notation to include class abstraction (class builder) of nested ordered pairs.
class {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑}
Syntax	cmpo 5927	Extend the definition of a class to include maps-to notation for defining an operation via a rule.
class (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶)
Definition	df-ov 5928	Define the value of an operation. Definition of operation value in [Enderton] p. 79. Note that the syntax is simply three class expressions in a row bracketed by parentheses. There are no restrictions of any kind on what those class expressions may be, although only certain kinds of class expressions - a binary operation 𝐹 and its arguments 𝐴 and 𝐵- will be useful for proving meaningful theorems. For example, if class 𝐹 is the operation + and arguments 𝐴 and 𝐵 are 3 and 2 , the expression ( 3 + 2 ) can be proved to equal 5 . This definition is well-defined, although not very meaningful, when classes 𝐴 and/or 𝐵 are proper classes (i.e. are not sets); see ovprc1 5962 and ovprc2 5963. On the other hand, we often find uses for this definition when 𝐹 is a proper class. 𝐹 is normally equal to a class of nested ordered pairs of the form defined by df-oprab 5929. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = (𝐹‘⟨𝐴, 𝐵⟩)
Definition	df-oprab 5929*	Define the class abstraction (class builder) of a collection of nested ordered pairs (for use in defining operations). This is a special case of Definition 4.16 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 14. Normally 𝑥, 𝑦, and 𝑧 are distinct, although the definition doesn't strictly require it. See df-ov 5928 for the value of an operation. The brace notation is called "class abstraction" by Quine; it is also called a "class builder" in the literature. The value of the most common operation class builder is given by ovmpo 6062. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1995.)
⊢ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑤 ∣ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧(𝑤 = ⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∧ 𝜑)}
Definition	df-mpo 5930*	Define maps-to notation for defining an operation via a rule. Read as "the operation defined by the map from 𝑥, 𝑦 (in 𝐴 × 𝐵) to 𝐵(𝑥, 𝑦)". An extension of df-mpt 4097 for two arguments. (Contributed by NM, 17-Feb-2008.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵) ∧ 𝑧 = 𝐶)}
Theorem	oveq 5931	Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
⊢ (𝐹 = 𝐺 → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = (𝐴𝐺𝐵))
Theorem	oveq1 5932	Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐶))
Theorem	oveq2 5933	Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐶𝐹𝐴) = (𝐶𝐹𝐵))
Theorem	oveq12 5934	Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jul-1995.)
⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 = 𝐷) → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷))
Theorem	oveq1i 5935	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐶)
Theorem	oveq2i 5936	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐶𝐹𝐴) = (𝐶𝐹𝐵)
Theorem	oveq12i 5937	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = 𝐷    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷)
Theorem	oveqi 5938	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-2007.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐶𝐴𝐷) = (𝐶𝐵𝐷)
Theorem	oveq123i 5939	Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by FL, 11-Jul-2010.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐶    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐷    &   ⊢ 𝐹 = 𝐺    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = (𝐶𝐺𝐷)
Theorem	oveq1d 5940	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐶))
Theorem	oveq2d 5941	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶𝐹𝐴) = (𝐶𝐹𝐵))
Theorem	oveqd 5942	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-2006.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶𝐴𝐷) = (𝐶𝐵𝐷))
Theorem	oveq12d 5943	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷))
Theorem	oveqan12d 5944	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝐶 = 𝐷)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷))
Theorem	oveqan12rd 5945	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝐶 = 𝐷)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷))
Theorem	oveq123d 5946	Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by FL, 22-Dec-2008.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = 𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐺𝐷))
Theorem	fvoveq1d 5947	Equality deduction for nested function and operation value. (Contributed by AV, 23-Jul-2022.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹‘(𝐴𝑂𝐶)) = (𝐹‘(𝐵𝑂𝐶)))
Theorem	fvoveq1 5948	Equality theorem for nested function and operation value. Closed form of fvoveq1d 5947. (Contributed by AV, 23-Jul-2022.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐹‘(𝐴𝑂𝐶)) = (𝐹‘(𝐵𝑂𝐶)))
Theorem	ovanraleqv 5949*	Equality theorem for a conjunction with an operation values within a restricted universal quantification. Technical theorem to be used to reduce the size of a significant number of proofs. (Contributed by AV, 13-Aug-2022.)
⊢ (𝐵 = 𝑋 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐵 = 𝑋 → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑉 (𝜑 ∧ (𝐴 · 𝐵) = 𝐶) ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑉 (𝜓 ∧ (𝐴 · 𝑋) = 𝐶)))
Theorem	imbrov2fvoveq 5950	Equality theorem for nested function and operation value in an implication for a binary relation. Technical theorem to be used to reduce the size of a significant number of proofs. (Contributed by AV, 17-Aug-2022.)
⊢ (𝑋 = 𝑌 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑋 = 𝑌 → ((𝜑 → (𝐹‘((𝐺‘𝑋) · 𝑂))𝑅𝐴) ↔ (𝜓 → (𝐹‘((𝐺‘𝑌) · 𝑂))𝑅𝐴)))
Theorem	ovrspc2v 5951*	If an operation value is element of a class for all operands of two classes, then the operation value is an element of the class for specific operands of the two classes. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2014.)
⊢ (((𝑋 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐵) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝑥𝐹𝑦) ∈ 𝐶) → (𝑋𝐹𝑌) ∈ 𝐶)
Theorem	oveqrspc2v 5952*	Restricted specialization of operands, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2014.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵)) → (𝑥𝐹𝑦) = (𝑥𝐺𝑦))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑋 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐵)) → (𝑋𝐹𝑌) = (𝑋𝐺𝑌))
Theorem	oveqdr 5953	Equality of two operations for any two operands. Useful in proofs using *propd theorems. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 29-Jun-2015.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = 𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝑥𝐹𝑦) = (𝑥𝐺𝑦))
Theorem	nfovd 5954	Deduction version of bound-variable hypothesis builder nfov 5955. (Contributed by NM, 13-Dec-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐹)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥(𝐴𝐹𝐵))
Theorem	nfov 5955	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-2004.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐹    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝐴𝐹𝐵)
Theorem	oprabidlem 5956*	Slight elaboration of exdistrfor 1814. A lemma for oprabid 5957. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2019.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝜓) → ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	oprabid 5957	The law of concretion. Special case of Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. Although this theorem would be useful with a distinct variable condition between 𝑥, 𝑦, and 𝑧, we use ax-bndl 1523 to eliminate that constraint. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 20-Mar-2013.)
⊢ (⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∈ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	fnovex 5958	The result of an operation is a set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2019.)
⊢ ((𝐹 Fn (𝐶 × 𝐷) ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) ∈ V)
Theorem	ovexg 5959	Evaluating a set operation at two sets gives a set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 19-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑋) → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) ∈ V)
Theorem	ovssunirng 5960	The result of an operation value is always a subset of the union of the range. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 12-Jan-2017.)
⊢ ((𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑋𝐹𝑌) ⊆ ∪ ran 𝐹)
Theorem	ovprc 5961	The value of an operation when the one of the arguments is a proper class. Note: this theorem is dependent on our particular definitions of operation value, function value, and ordered pair. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2015.)
⊢ Rel dom 𝐹    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ (𝐴 ∈ V ∧ 𝐵 ∈ V) → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = ∅)
Theorem	ovprc1 5962	The value of an operation when the first argument is a proper class. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2004.)
⊢ Rel dom 𝐹    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ 𝐴 ∈ V → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = ∅)
Theorem	ovprc2 5963	The value of an operation when the second argument is a proper class. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2015.)
⊢ Rel dom 𝐹    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ 𝐵 ∈ V → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = ∅)
Theorem	csbov123g 5964	Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 5-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐷 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝐵𝐹𝐶) = (⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐹⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐶))
Theorem	csbov12g 5965*	Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝐵𝐹𝐶) = (⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵𝐹⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐶))
Theorem	csbov1g 5966*	Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝐵𝐹𝐶) = (⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵𝐹𝐶))
Theorem	csbov2g 5967*	Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝐵𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐶))
Theorem	rspceov 5968*	A frequently used special case of rspc2ev 2883 for operation values. (Contributed by NM, 21-Mar-2007.)
⊢ ((𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝑆 = (𝐶𝐹𝐷)) → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑆 = (𝑥𝐹𝑦))
Theorem	fnotovb 5969	Equivalence of operation value and ordered triple membership, analogous to fnopfvb 5605. (Contributed by NM, 17-Dec-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.)
⊢ ((𝐹 Fn (𝐴 × 𝐵) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐵) → ((𝐶𝐹𝐷) = 𝑅 ↔ ⟨𝐶, 𝐷, 𝑅⟩ ∈ 𝐹))
Theorem	opabbrex 5970*	A collection of ordered pairs with an extension of a binary relation is a set. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 1-Nov-2017.)
⊢ ((𝑉 ∈ V ∧ 𝐸 ∈ V) → (𝑓(𝑉𝑊𝐸)𝑝 → 𝜃))    &   ⊢ ((𝑉 ∈ V ∧ 𝐸 ∈ V) → {⟨𝑓, 𝑝⟩ ∣ 𝜃} ∈ V)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑉 ∈ V ∧ 𝐸 ∈ V) → {⟨𝑓, 𝑝⟩ ∣ (𝑓(𝑉𝑊𝐸)𝑝 ∧ 𝜓)} ∈ V)
Theorem	0neqopab 5971	The empty set is never an element in an ordered-pair class abstraction. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 5-Nov-2017.)
⊢ ¬ ∅ ∈ {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	brabvv 5972*	If two classes are in a relationship given by an ordered-pair class abstraction, the classes are sets. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 16-Jan-2019.)
⊢ (𝑋{⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝜑}𝑌 → (𝑋 ∈ V ∧ 𝑌 ∈ V))
Theorem	dfoprab2 5973*	Class abstraction for operations in terms of class abstraction of ordered pairs. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1995.)
⊢ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} = {⟨𝑤, 𝑧⟩ ∣ ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝑤 = ⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∧ 𝜑)}
Theorem	reloprab 5974*	An operation class abstraction is a relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2004.)
⊢ Rel {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	nfoprab1 5975	The abstraction variables in an operation class abstraction are not free. (Contributed by NM, 25-Apr-1995.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 19-Jun-2012.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥{⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	nfoprab2 5976	The abstraction variables in an operation class abstraction are not free. (Contributed by NM, 25-Apr-1995.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 30-Jul-2012.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦{⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	nfoprab3 5977	The abstraction variables in an operation class abstraction are not free. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-2013.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧{⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	nfoprab 5978*	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for an operation class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-2013.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤{⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	oprabbid 5979*	Equivalent wff's yield equal operation class abstractions (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜓} = {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜒})
Theorem	oprabbidv 5980*	Equivalent wff's yield equal operation class abstractions (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜓} = {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜒})
Theorem	oprabbii 5981*	Equivalent wff's yield equal operation class abstractions. (Contributed by NM, 28-May-1995.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 19-Jun-2012.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} = {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜓}
Theorem	ssoprab2 5982	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. Compare ssopab2 4311. (Contributed by FL, 6-Nov-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝜓) → {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜓})
Theorem	ssoprab2b 5983	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. Compare ssopab2b 4312. (Contributed by FL, 6-Nov-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.)
⊢ ({⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	eqoprab2b 5984	Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and biconditional. Compare eqopab2b 4315. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Jan-2017.)
⊢ ({⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} = {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	mpoeq123 5985*	An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Mar-2015.)
⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐷 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐵 = 𝐸 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝐶 = 𝐹)) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐷, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐸 ↦ 𝐹))
Theorem	mpoeq12 5986*	An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.)
⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐸) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷 ↦ 𝐸))
Theorem	mpoeq123dva 5987*	An equality deduction for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jan-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐷)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐸)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵)) → 𝐶 = 𝐹)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐷, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐸 ↦ 𝐹))
Theorem	mpoeq123dv 5988*	An equality deduction for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Sep-2011.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐷)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐸)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐹)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐷, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐸 ↦ 𝐹))
Theorem	mpoeq123i 5989	An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jul-2013.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐷    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐸    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = 𝐹    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐷, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐸 ↦ 𝐹)
Theorem	mpoeq3dva 5990*	Slightly more general equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 17-Oct-2013.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝐶 = 𝐷)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐷))
Theorem	mpoeq3ia 5991	An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.)
⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝐶 = 𝐷)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐷)
Theorem	mpoeq3dv 5992*	An equality deduction for the maps-to notation restricted to the value of the operation. (Contributed by SO, 16-Jul-2018.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐷))
Theorem	nfmpo1 5993	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for an operation in maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Aug-2013.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶)
Theorem	nfmpo2 5994	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for an operation in maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Aug-2013.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶)
Theorem	nfmpo 5995*	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 20-Feb-2013.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝐴    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝐵    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝐶    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶)
Theorem	mpo0 5996	A mapping operation with empty domain. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 29-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ ∅, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = ∅
Theorem	oprab4 5997*	Two ways to state the domain of an operation. (Contributed by FL, 24-Jan-2010.)
⊢ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ (⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∈ (𝐴 × 𝐵) ∧ 𝜑)} = {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵) ∧ 𝜑)}
Theorem	cbvoprab1 5998*	Rule used to change first bound variable in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 20-Dec-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 5-Dec-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑤 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} = {⟨⟨𝑤, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜓}
Theorem	cbvoprab2 5999*	Change the second bound variable in an operation abstraction. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 11-Jun-2010.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑤 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} = {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑤⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜓}
Theorem	cbvoprab12 6000*	Rule used to change first two bound variables in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑣𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓    &   ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑤 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑣) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ {⟨⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜑} = {⟨⟨𝑤, 𝑣⟩, 𝑧⟩ ∣ 𝜓}