Theorem bj-substax12 36251

Description: Equivalent form of the axiom of substitution bj-ax12 36186. Although both sides need a DV condition on 𝑥, 𝑡 (or as in bj-ax12v3 36215 on 𝑡, 𝜑) to hold, their equivalence holds without DV conditions. The forward implication is proved in modal (K4) while the reverse implication is proved in modal (T5). The LHS has the advantage of not involving nested quantifiers on the same variable. Its metaweakening is proved from the core axiom schemes in bj-substw 36252. Note that in the LHS, the reverse implication holds by equs4 2409 (or equs4v 1995 if a DV condition is added on 𝑥, 𝑡 as in bj-ax12 36186), and the forward implication is sbalex 2230.

The LHS can be read as saying that if there exists a setvar equal to a given term witnessing 𝜑, then all setvars equal to that term also witness 𝜑. An equivalent suggestive form for the LHS is ¬ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) ∧ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)), which expresses that there can be no two variables both equal to a given term, one witnessing 𝜑 and the other witnessing ¬ 𝜑. (Contributed by BJ, 21-May-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

Assertion

Ref	Expression
bj-substax12	⊢ ((∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))))

Proof of Theorem bj-substax12

Step	Hyp	Ref	Expression
1		bj-modal4 36244	. . . . 5 ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))
2	1	imim2i 16	. . . 4 ⊢ ((∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)))
3		19.38 1833	. . . 4 ⊢ ((∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) → ∀𝑥((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)))
4	2, 3	syl 17	. . 3 ⊢ ((∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) → ∀𝑥((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)))
5		hbe1a 2132	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (∃𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))
6	5, 1	syl 17	. . . . 5 ⊢ (∃𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))
7		bj-exlimg 36152	. . . . 5 ⊢ ((∃𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) → (∀𝑥((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))))
8	6, 7	ax-mp 5	. . . 4 ⊢ (∀𝑥((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)))
9		sp 2171	. . . . 5 ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))
10	9	imim2i 16	. . . 4 ⊢ ((∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)))
11	8, 10	syl 17	. . 3 ⊢ (∀𝑥((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)))
12	4, 11	impbii 208	. 2 ⊢ ((∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) ↔ ∀𝑥((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)))
13		impexp 449	. . 3 ⊢ (((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) ↔ (𝑥 = 𝑡 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))))
14	13	albii 1813	. 2 ⊢ (∀𝑥((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))))
15	12, 14	bitri 274	1 ⊢ ((∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))))

Syntax hints:   → wi 4   ↔ wb 205   ∧ wa 394  ∀wal 1531  ∃wex 1773

This theorem was proved from axioms:  ax-mp 5  ax-1 6  ax-2 7  ax-3 8  ax-gen 1789  ax-4 1803  ax-5 1905  ax-6 1963  ax-7 2003  ax-10 2129  ax-12 2166

This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 206  df-an 395  df-ex 1774

This theorem is referenced by: (None)