Theorem bj-substax12 36704

Description: Equivalent form of the axiom of substitution bj-ax12 36640. Although both sides need a DV condition on 𝑥, 𝑡 (or as in bj-ax12v3 36668 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 36705. Note that in the LHS, the reverse implication holds by equs4 2419 (or equs4v 1997 if a DV condition is added on 𝑥, 𝑡 as in bj-ax12 36640), and the forward implication is sbalex 2240.

The LHS can be read as saying that if there exists a variable equal to a given term witnessing a given formula, then all variables equal to that term also witness that formula. The equivalent form of the LHS using only primitive symbols is (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑) ∨ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → ¬ 𝜑)), which expresses that a given formula is true at all variables equal to a given term, or false at all these variables. An equivalent form of the LHS using only the existential quantifier 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 a formula and the other witnessing its negation. These equivalences do not hold in intuitionistic logic. The LHS should be the preferred form, and has the advantage of having no negation nor nested quantifiers. (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 36697	. . . . 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 1836	. . . 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 2142	. . . . . 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 36606	. . . . 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 2181	. . . . 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 209	. 2 ⊢ ((∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) ↔ ∀𝑥((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)))
13		impexp 450	. . 3 ⊢ (((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) ↔ (𝑥 = 𝑡 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))))
14	13	albii 1816	. 2 ⊢ (∀𝑥((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))))
15	12, 14	bitri 275	1 ⊢ ((∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))))

Syntax hints:   → wi 4   ↔ wb 206   ∧ wa 395  ∀wal 1535  ∃wex 1776

This theorem was proved from axioms:  ax-mp 5  ax-1 6  ax-2 7  ax-3 8  ax-gen 1792  ax-4 1806  ax-5 1908  ax-6 1965  ax-7 2005  ax-10 2139  ax-12 2175

This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 207  df-an 396  df-ex 1777

This theorem is referenced by: (None)