| Intuitionistic Logic Explorer Theorem List (p. 60 of 161) | < 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 | isoso 5901 | An isomorphism preserves strict ordering. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 16-Nov-2014.) |
| ⊢ (𝐻 Isom 𝑅, 𝑆 (𝐴, 𝐵) → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Or 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | f1oiso 5902* | Any one-to-one onto function determines an isomorphism with an induced relation 𝑆. Proposition 6.33 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 34. (Contributed by NM, 30-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐻:𝐴–1-1-onto→𝐵 ∧ 𝑆 = {〈𝑧, 𝑤〉 ∣ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑧 = (𝐻‘𝑥) ∧ 𝑤 = (𝐻‘𝑦)) ∧ 𝑥𝑅𝑦)}) → 𝐻 Isom 𝑅, 𝑆 (𝐴, 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | f1oiso2 5903* | Any one-to-one onto function determines an isomorphism with an induced relation 𝑆. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Mar-2013.) |
| ⊢ 𝑆 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵) ∧ (◡𝐻‘𝑥)𝑅(◡𝐻‘𝑦))} ⇒ ⊢ (𝐻:𝐴–1-1-onto→𝐵 → 𝐻 Isom 𝑅, 𝑆 (𝐴, 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | canth 5904 | No set 𝐴 is equinumerous to its power set (Cantor's theorem), i.e., no function can map 𝐴 onto its power set. Compare Theorem 6B(b) of [Enderton] p. 132. (Use nex 1524 if you want the form ¬ ∃𝑓𝑓:𝐴–onto→𝒫 𝐴.) (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Noah R Kingdon, 23-Jul-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ¬ 𝐹:𝐴–onto→𝒫 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | crio 5905 | Extend class notation with restricted description binder. |
| class (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) | ||
| Definition | df-riota 5906 | Define restricted description binder. In case there is no unique 𝑥 such that (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑) holds, it evaluates to the empty set. See also comments for df-iota 5237. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) (Revised by NM, 2-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = (℩𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | riotaeqdv 5907* | Formula-building deduction for iota. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | riotabidv 5908* | Formula-building deduction for restricted iota. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | riotaeqbidv 5909* | Equality deduction for restricted universal quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | riotaexg 5910* | Restricted iota is a set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | iotaexel 5911* | Set existence of an iota expression in which all values are contained within a set. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 28-Jun-2025.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) → (℩𝑥𝜑) ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | riotav 5912 | An iota restricted to the universe is unrestricted. (Contributed by NM, 18-Sep-2011.) |
| ⊢ (℩𝑥 ∈ V 𝜑) = (℩𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | riotauni 5913 | Restricted iota in terms of class union. (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = ∪ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑}) | ||
| Theorem | nfriota1 5914* | The abstraction variable in a restricted iota descriptor isn't free. (Contributed by NM, 12-Oct-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | nfriotadxy 5915* | Deduction version of nfriota 5916. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 12-Jan-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥(℩𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | nfriota 5916* | A variable not free in a wff remains so in a restricted iota descriptor. (Contributed by NM, 12-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(℩𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | cbvriota 5917* | Change bound variable in a restricted description binder. (Contributed by NM, 18-Mar-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = (℩𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | cbvriotav 5918* | Change bound variable in a restricted description binder. (Contributed by NM, 18-Mar-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = (℩𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | csbriotag 5919* | Interchange class substitution and restricted description binder. (Contributed by NM, 24-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(℩𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑) = (℩𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | riotacl2 5920 |
Membership law for "the unique element in 𝐴 such that 𝜑."
(Contributed by NM, 21-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 23-Dec-2016.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) ∈ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑}) | ||
| Theorem | riotacl 5921* | Closure of restricted iota. (Contributed by NM, 21-Aug-2011.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | riotasbc 5922 | Substitution law for descriptions. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-2011.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → [(℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | riotabidva 5923* | Equivalent wff's yield equal restricted class abstractions (deduction form). (rabbidva 2761 analog.) (Contributed by NM, 17-Jan-2012.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | riotabiia 5924 | Equivalent wff's yield equal restricted iotas (inference form). (rabbiia 2758 analog.) (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | riota1 5925* | Property of restricted iota. Compare iota1 5251. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | riota1a 5926 | Property of iota. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) → (𝜑 ↔ (℩𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) = 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | riota2df 5927* | A deduction version of riota2f 5928. (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 5928* | 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 5929* | 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 5930* | Properties of a restricted definite description operator. Todo (df-riota 5906 update): can some uses of riota2f 5928 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 5931* | 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 5932* | 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 5933* | 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 5934* | 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 5935* | 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 5936 | 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 5937* | 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 5938* | 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 5939* | 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 5940* | 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 5941* | 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 5942* | Lemma for acexmid 5950. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)} & ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)} & ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵} ⇒ ⊢ ({∅} ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | acexmidlemb 5943* | Lemma for acexmid 5950. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)} & ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)} & ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵} ⇒ ⊢ (∅ ∈ 𝐵 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | acexmidlemph 5944* | Lemma for acexmid 5950. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 6-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝜑)} & ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ {∅, {∅}} ∣ (𝑥 = {∅} ∨ 𝜑)} & ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝐴, 𝐵} ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | acexmidlemab 5945* | Lemma for acexmid 5950. (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 5946* |
Lemma for acexmid 5950. 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 5278. 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 5947* | Lemma for acexmid 5950. List the cases identified in acexmidlemcase 5946 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 5948* |
Lemma for acexmid 5950. This builds on acexmidlem1 5947 by noting that every
element of 𝐶 is inhabited.
(Note that 𝑦 is not quite a function in the df-fun 5278 sense because it uses ordered pairs as described in opthreg 4608 rather than df-op 3643). The set 𝐴 is also found in onsucelsucexmidlem 4581. (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 5949* |
Lemma for acexmid 5950.
This is acexmid 5950 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 5950* |
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 7325 and df-exmid 4243 syntaxes, see exmidac 7328. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 4-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Syntax | co 5951 | 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 5952 | Extend class notation to include class abstraction (class builder) of nested ordered pairs. |
| class {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Syntax | cmpo 5953 | 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 5954 | 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 5988 and ovprc2 5989. 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 5955. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = (𝐹‘〈𝐴, 𝐵〉) | ||
| Definition | df-oprab 5955* | 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 5954 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 6088. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑤 ∣ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧(𝑤 = 〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∧ 𝜑)} | ||
| Definition | df-mpo 5956* | 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 4111 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 5957 | Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 = 𝐺 → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = (𝐴𝐺𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq1 5958 | Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq2 5959 | Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐶𝐹𝐴) = (𝐶𝐹𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq12 5960 | Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jul-1995.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 = 𝐷) → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq1i 5961 | Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | oveq2i 5962 | Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐶𝐹𝐴) = (𝐶𝐹𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | oveq12i 5963 | 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 5964 | Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-2007.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐶𝐴𝐷) = (𝐶𝐵𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | oveq123i 5965 | Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by FL, 11-Jul-2010.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐶 & ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐷 & ⊢ 𝐹 = 𝐺 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = (𝐶𝐺𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | oveq1d 5966 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq2d 5967 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶𝐹𝐴) = (𝐶𝐹𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | oveqd 5968 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶𝐴𝐷) = (𝐶𝐵𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq12d 5969 | 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 5970 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | oveqan12rd 5971 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq123d 5972 | 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 5973 | Equality deduction for nested function and operation value. (Contributed by AV, 23-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹‘(𝐴𝑂𝐶)) = (𝐹‘(𝐵𝑂𝐶))) | ||
| Theorem | fvoveq1 5974 | Equality theorem for nested function and operation value. Closed form of fvoveq1d 5973. (Contributed by AV, 23-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐹‘(𝐴𝑂𝐶)) = (𝐹‘(𝐵𝑂𝐶))) | ||
| Theorem | ovanraleqv 5975* | 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 5976 | 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 5977* | 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 5978* | 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 5979 | 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 5980 | Deduction version of bound-variable hypothesis builder nfov 5981. (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 5981 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-2004.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐹 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝐴𝐹𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | oprabidlem 5982* | Slight elaboration of exdistrfor 1824. A lemma for oprabid 5983. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝜓) → ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | oprabid 5983 | 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 1533 to eliminate that constraint. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 20-Mar-2013.) |
| ⊢ (〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∈ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | fnovex 5984 | 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 5985 | 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 5986 | 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 5987 | 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 5988 | 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 5989 | 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 5990 | 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 5991* | 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 5992* | 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 5993* | 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 5994* | A frequently used special case of rspc2ev 2893 for operation values. (Contributed by NM, 21-Mar-2007.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝑆 = (𝐶𝐹𝐷)) → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑆 = (𝑥𝐹𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | fnotovb 5995 | Equivalence of operation value and ordered triple membership, analogous to fnopfvb 5627. (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 5996* | 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 5997 | 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 5998* | 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 5999* | 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 6000* | An operation class abstraction is a relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2004.) |
| ⊢ Rel {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |