![]() |
Metamath Proof Explorer |
< Previous
Next >
Nearby theorems |
|
Mirrors > Home > MPE Home > Th. List > 1kp2ke3k | Structured version Visualization version GIF version |
Description: Example for df-dec 12700, 1000 + 2000 = 3000.
This proof disproves (by counterexample) the assertion of Hao Wang, who stated, "There is a theorem in the primitive notation of set theory that corresponds to the arithmetic theorem 1000 + 2000 = 3000. The formula would be forbiddingly long... even if (one) knows the definitions and is asked to simplify the long formula according to them, chances are he will make errors and arrive at some incorrect result." (Hao Wang, "Theory and practice in mathematics" , In Thomas Tymoczko, editor, New Directions in the Philosophy of Mathematics, pp 129-152, Birkauser Boston, Inc., Boston, 1986. (QA8.6.N48). The quote itself is on page 140.) This is noted in Metamath: A Computer Language for Pure Mathematics by Norman Megill (2007) section 1.1.3. Megill then states, "A number of writers have conveyed the impression that the kind of absolute rigor provided by Metamath is an impossible dream, suggesting that a complete, formal verification of a typical theorem would take millions of steps in untold volumes of books... These writers assume, however, that in order to achieve the kind of complete formal verification they desire one must break down a proof into individual primitive steps that make direct reference to the axioms. This is not necessary. There is no reason not to make use of previously proved theorems rather than proving them over and over... A hierarchy of theorems and definitions permits an exponential growth in the formula sizes and primitive proof steps to be described with only a linear growth in the number of symbols used. Of course, this is how ordinary informal mathematics is normally done anyway, but with Metamath it can be done with absolute rigor and precision." The proof here starts with (2 + 1) = 3, commutes it, and repeatedly multiplies both sides by ten. This is certainly longer than traditional mathematical proofs, e.g., there are a number of steps explicitly shown here to show that we're allowed to do operations such as multiplication. However, while longer, the proof is clearly a manageable size - even though every step is rigorously derived all the way back to the primitive notions of set theory and logic. And while there's a risk of making errors, the many independent verifiers make it much less likely that an incorrect result will be accepted. This proof heavily relies on the decimal constructor df-dec 12700 developed by Mario Carneiro in 2015. The underlying Metamath language has an intentionally very small set of primitives; it doesn't even have a built-in construct for numbers. Instead, the digits are defined using these primitives, and the decimal constructor is used to make it easy to express larger numbers as combinations of digits. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 29-Jun-2016.) (Shortened by Mario Carneiro using the arithmetic algorithm in mmj2, 30-Jun-2016.) |
Ref | Expression |
---|---|
1kp2ke3k | ⊢ (;;;1000 + ;;;2000) = ;;;3000 |
Step | Hyp | Ref | Expression |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 1nn0 12510 | . . . 4 ⊢ 1 ∈ ℕ0 | |
2 | 0nn0 12509 | . . . 4 ⊢ 0 ∈ ℕ0 | |
3 | 1, 2 | deccl 12714 | . . 3 ⊢ ;10 ∈ ℕ0 |
4 | 3, 2 | deccl 12714 | . 2 ⊢ ;;100 ∈ ℕ0 |
5 | 2nn0 12511 | . . . 4 ⊢ 2 ∈ ℕ0 | |
6 | 5, 2 | deccl 12714 | . . 3 ⊢ ;20 ∈ ℕ0 |
7 | 6, 2 | deccl 12714 | . 2 ⊢ ;;200 ∈ ℕ0 |
8 | eqid 2727 | . 2 ⊢ ;;;1000 = ;;;1000 | |
9 | eqid 2727 | . 2 ⊢ ;;;2000 = ;;;2000 | |
10 | eqid 2727 | . . 3 ⊢ ;;100 = ;;100 | |
11 | eqid 2727 | . . 3 ⊢ ;;200 = ;;200 | |
12 | eqid 2727 | . . . 4 ⊢ ;10 = ;10 | |
13 | eqid 2727 | . . . 4 ⊢ ;20 = ;20 | |
14 | 1p2e3 12377 | . . . 4 ⊢ (1 + 2) = 3 | |
15 | 00id 11411 | . . . 4 ⊢ (0 + 0) = 0 | |
16 | 1, 2, 5, 2, 12, 13, 14, 15 | decadd 12753 | . . 3 ⊢ (;10 + ;20) = ;30 |
17 | 3, 2, 6, 2, 10, 11, 16, 15 | decadd 12753 | . 2 ⊢ (;;100 + ;;200) = ;;300 |
18 | 4, 2, 7, 2, 8, 9, 17, 15 | decadd 12753 | 1 ⊢ (;;;1000 + ;;;2000) = ;;;3000 |
Colors of variables: wff setvar class |
Syntax hints: = wceq 1534 (class class class)co 7414 0cc0 11130 1c1 11131 + caddc 11133 2c2 12289 3c3 12290 ;cdc 12699 |
This theorem was proved from axioms: ax-mp 5 ax-1 6 ax-2 7 ax-3 8 ax-gen 1790 ax-4 1804 ax-5 1906 ax-6 1964 ax-7 2004 ax-8 2101 ax-9 2109 ax-10 2130 ax-11 2147 ax-12 2164 ax-ext 2698 ax-sep 5293 ax-nul 5300 ax-pow 5359 ax-pr 5423 ax-un 7734 ax-resscn 11187 ax-1cn 11188 ax-icn 11189 ax-addcl 11190 ax-addrcl 11191 ax-mulcl 11192 ax-mulrcl 11193 ax-mulcom 11194 ax-addass 11195 ax-mulass 11196 ax-distr 11197 ax-i2m1 11198 ax-1ne0 11199 ax-1rid 11200 ax-rnegex 11201 ax-rrecex 11202 ax-cnre 11203 ax-pre-lttri 11204 ax-pre-lttrn 11205 ax-pre-ltadd 11206 |
This theorem depends on definitions: df-bi 206 df-an 396 df-or 847 df-3or 1086 df-3an 1087 df-tru 1537 df-fal 1547 df-ex 1775 df-nf 1779 df-sb 2061 df-mo 2529 df-eu 2558 df-clab 2705 df-cleq 2719 df-clel 2805 df-nfc 2880 df-ne 2936 df-nel 3042 df-ral 3057 df-rex 3066 df-reu 3372 df-rab 3428 df-v 3471 df-sbc 3775 df-csb 3890 df-dif 3947 df-un 3949 df-in 3951 df-ss 3961 df-pss 3963 df-nul 4319 df-if 4525 df-pw 4600 df-sn 4625 df-pr 4627 df-op 4631 df-uni 4904 df-iun 4993 df-br 5143 df-opab 5205 df-mpt 5226 df-tr 5260 df-id 5570 df-eprel 5576 df-po 5584 df-so 5585 df-fr 5627 df-we 5629 df-xp 5678 df-rel 5679 df-cnv 5680 df-co 5681 df-dm 5682 df-rn 5683 df-res 5684 df-ima 5685 df-pred 6299 df-ord 6366 df-on 6367 df-lim 6368 df-suc 6369 df-iota 6494 df-fun 6544 df-fn 6545 df-f 6546 df-f1 6547 df-fo 6548 df-f1o 6549 df-fv 6550 df-ov 7417 df-om 7865 df-2nd 7988 df-frecs 8280 df-wrecs 8311 df-recs 8385 df-rdg 8424 df-er 8718 df-en 8956 df-dom 8957 df-sdom 8958 df-pnf 11272 df-mnf 11273 df-ltxr 11275 df-nn 12235 df-2 12297 df-3 12298 df-4 12299 df-5 12300 df-6 12301 df-7 12302 df-8 12303 df-9 12304 df-n0 12495 df-dec 12700 |
This theorem is referenced by: (None) |
Copyright terms: Public domain | W3C validator |