Theorem frege55b 44000

Description: Lemma for frege57b 44002. Proposition 55 of [Frege1879] p. 50.

Note that eqtr2 2752 incorporates eqcom 2738 which is stronger than this proposition which is identical to equcomi 2018. Is it possible that Frege tricked himself into assuming what he was out to prove? (Contributed by RP, 24-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

Assertion

Ref	Expression
frege55b	⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑦 = 𝑥)

Proof of Theorem frege55b

Dummy variable 𝑧 is distinct from all other variables.

Step	Hyp	Ref	Expression
1		frege55lem2b 43999	. 2 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → [𝑦 / 𝑧]𝑧 = 𝑥)
2		dfsb1 2481	. . 3 ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑧]𝑧 = 𝑥 ↔ ((𝑧 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 = 𝑥) ∧ ∃𝑧(𝑧 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑧 = 𝑥)))
3		eqtr2 2752	. . . . 5 ⊢ ((𝑧 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑧 = 𝑥) → 𝑦 = 𝑥)
4	3	exlimiv 1931	. . . 4 ⊢ (∃𝑧(𝑧 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑧 = 𝑥) → 𝑦 = 𝑥)
5	4	adantl 481	. . 3 ⊢ (((𝑧 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 = 𝑥) ∧ ∃𝑧(𝑧 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑧 = 𝑥)) → 𝑦 = 𝑥)
6	2, 5	sylbi 217	. 2 ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑧]𝑧 = 𝑥 → 𝑦 = 𝑥)
7	1, 6	syl 17	1 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑦 = 𝑥)

Syntax hints:   → wi 4   ∧ wa 395  ∃wex 1780  [wsb 2067

This theorem was proved from axioms:  ax-mp 5  ax-1 6  ax-2 7  ax-3 8  ax-gen 1796  ax-4 1810  ax-5 1911  ax-6 1968  ax-7 2009  ax-8 2113  ax-9 2121  ax-10 2144  ax-12 2180  ax-13 2372  ax-ext 2703  ax-frege8 43912  ax-frege52c 43991

This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 207  df-an 396  df-or 848  df-ex 1781  df-nf 1785  df-sb 2068  df-clab 2710  df-cleq 2723  df-clel 2806  df-sbc 3737

This theorem is referenced by:  frege56b  44001