Theorem dtru 5236

Description: At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). Note that we may not substitute the same variable for both 𝑥 and 𝑦 (as indicated by the distinct variable requirement), for otherwise we would contradict stdpc6 2035.

This theorem is proved directly from set theory axioms (no set theory definitions) and does not use ax-ext 2770 or ax-sep 5167. See dtruALT 5254 for a shorter proof using these axioms.

The proof makes use of dummy variables 𝑧 and 𝑤 which do not appear in the final theorem. They must be distinct from each other and from 𝑥 and 𝑦. In other words, if we were to substitute 𝑥 for 𝑧 throughout the proof, the proof would fail. (Contributed by NM, 7-Nov-2006.) Avoid ax-13 2379. (Revised by Gino Giotto, 5-Sep-2023.)

Assertion

Ref	Expression
dtru	⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦

Distinct variable group:   𝑥,𝑦

Proof of Theorem dtru

Dummy variables 𝑤 𝑧 are mutually distinct and distinct from all other variables.

Step	Hyp	Ref	Expression
1		el 5235	. . . 4 ⊢ ∃𝑤 𝑥 ∈ 𝑤
2		ax-nul 5174	. . . . 5 ⊢ ∃𝑧∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧
3		sp 2180	. . . . 5 ⊢ (∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 → ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧)
4	2, 3	eximii 1838	. . . 4 ⊢ ∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧
5		exdistrv 1956	. . . 4 ⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) ↔ (∃𝑤 𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧))
6	1, 4, 5	mpbir2an 710	. . 3 ⊢ ∃𝑤∃𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧)
7		ax9v2 2124	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (𝑤 = 𝑧 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧))
8	7	com12 32	. . . . 5 ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 → (𝑤 = 𝑧 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧))
9	8	con3dimp 412	. . . 4 ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧)
10	9	2eximi 1837	. . 3 ⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → ∃𝑤∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧)
11		equequ2 2033	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝑤 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑤 = 𝑦))
12	11	notbid 321	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 ↔ ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦))
13		nfv 1915	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦
14		ax7v1 2017	. . . . . . . 8 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑤 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑤 = 𝑦))
15	14	con3d 155	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑤 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
16	13, 15	spimefv 2196	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
17	12, 16	syl6bi 256	. . . . 5 ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
18		nfv 1915	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 ¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦
19		ax7v1 2017	. . . . . . . 8 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 = 𝑦))
20	19	con3d 155	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
21	18, 20	spimefv 2196	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
22	21	a1d 25	. . . . 5 ⊢ (¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
23	17, 22	pm2.61i 185	. . . 4 ⊢ (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
24	23	exlimivv 1933	. . 3 ⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
25	6, 10, 24	mp2b 10	. 2 ⊢ ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦
26		exnal 1828	. 2 ⊢ (∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
27	25, 26	mpbi 233	1 ⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦

Syntax hints:  ¬ wn 3   → wi 4   ∧ wa 399  ∀wal 1536  ∃wex 1781

This theorem was proved from axioms:  ax-mp 5  ax-1 6  ax-2 7  ax-3 8  ax-gen 1797  ax-4 1811  ax-5 1911  ax-6 1970  ax-7 2015  ax-8 2113  ax-9 2121  ax-12 2175  ax-nul 5174  ax-pow 5231

This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 210  df-an 400  df-tru 1541  df-ex 1782  df-nf 1786

This theorem is referenced by:  dtrucor  5237  dvdemo1  5239  nfnid  5241  axc16b  5255  eunex  5256  brprcneu  6637  zfcndpow  10027