| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 10 of 504) | < Previous Next > | |
| Bad symbols? Try the
GIF version. |
||
|
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > MPE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
||
| Color key: | (1-31065) |
(31066-32588) |
(32589-50379) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | orel2 901 | Elimination of disjunction by denial of a disjunct. Theorem *2.56 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Apr-2013.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜑) → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.67-2 902 | Slight generalization of Theorem *2.67 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.67 903 | Theorem *2.67 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | curryax 904 | A non-intuitionistic positive statement, sometimes called a paradox of material implication. Sometimes called Curry's axiom. Similar to exmid 905 (obtained by substituting ⊥ for 𝜓) but positive. For another non-intuitionistic positive statement, see peirce 204. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | exmid 905 | Law of excluded middle, also called the principle of tertium non datur. Theorem *2.11 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. It says that something is either true or not true; there are no in-between values of truth. This is an essential distinction of our classical logic and is not a theorem of intuitionistic logic. In intuitionistic logic, if this statement is true for some 𝜑, then 𝜑 is decidable. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1992.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | exmidd 906 | Law of excluded middle in a context. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.1 907 | Theorem *2.1 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.13 908 | Theorem *2.13 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ ¬ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.621 909 | Theorem *2.621 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.62 910 | Theorem *2.62 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.68 911 | Theorem *2.68 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | dfor2 912 | Logical 'or' expressed in terms of implication only. Theorem *5.25 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-2004.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Oct-2012.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.07 913 | Theorem *2.07 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | pm1.2 914 | Axiom *1.2 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 96, which they call "Taut". (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜑) → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | oridm 915 | Idempotent law for disjunction. Theorem *4.25 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 16-Apr-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Mar-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.25 916 | Theorem *4.25 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.4 917 | Theorem *2.4 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 106. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.41 918 | Theorem *2.41 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 106. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 ∨ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | orim12i 919 | Disjoin antecedents and consequents of two premises. (Contributed by NM, 6-Jun-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | orim1i 920 | Introduce disjunct to both sides of an implication. (Contributed by NM, 6-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | orim2i 921 | Introduce disjunct to both sides of an implication. (Contributed by NM, 6-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜒 ∨ 𝜑) → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | orim12dALT 922 | Alternate proof of orim12d 977 which does not depend on df-an 400. This is an illustration of the conservativity of definitions (definitions do not permit to prove additional theorems whose statements do not contain the defined symbol). (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 8-Aug-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃) → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | orbi2i 923 | Inference adding a left disjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Dec-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜒 ∨ 𝜑) ↔ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | orbi1i 924 | Inference adding a right disjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | orbi12i 925 | Infer the disjunction of two equivalences. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | orbi2d 926 | Deduction adding a left disjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜃 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜃 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | orbi1d 927 | Deduction adding a right disjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | orbi1 928 | Theorem *4.37 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 118. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | orbi12d 929 | Deduction joining two equivalences to form equivalence of disjunctions. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | pm1.5 930 | Axiom *1.5 (Assoc) of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 96. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) → (𝜓 ∨ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | or12 931 | Swap two disjuncts. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜓 ∨ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | orass 932 | Associative law for disjunction. Theorem *4.33 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 118. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 26-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.31 933 | Theorem *2.31 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 104. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.32 934 | Theorem *2.32 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 105. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) → (𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.3 935 | Theorem *2.3 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 104. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) → (𝜑 ∨ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | or32 936 | A rearrangement of disjuncts. (Contributed by NM, 18-Oct-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 26-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | or4 937 | Rearrangement of 4 disjuncts. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | or42 938 | Rearrangement of 4 disjuncts. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜃 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | orordi 939 | Distribution of disjunction over disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 25-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | orordir 940 | Distribution of disjunction over disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 25-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | orimdi 941 | Disjunction distributes over implication. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.76 942 | Theorem *2.76 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.85 943 | Theorem *2.85 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒)) → (𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 → 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.75 944 | Theorem *2.75 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.78 945 | Implication distributes over disjunction. Theorem *4.78 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 121. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∨ (𝜑 → 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | biort 946 | A disjunction with a true formula is equivalent to that true formula. (Contributed by NM, 23-May-1999.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | biorf 947 | A wff is equivalent to its disjunction with falsehood. Theorem *4.74 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 121. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | biortn 948 | A wff is equivalent to its negated disjunction with falsehood. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | biorfi 949 | The dual of biorf 947 is not biantr 815 but iba 535 (and ibar 536). So there should also be a "biorfr". (Note that these four statements can actually be strengthened to biconditionals.) (Contributed by BJ, 26-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | biorfri 950 | A wff is equivalent to its disjunction with falsehood. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 16-Jul-2021.) (Proof shortened by AV, 10-Aug-2025.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | biorfriOLD 951 | Obsolete version of biorfri 950 as of 10-Aug-2025. A wff is equivalent to its disjunction with falsehood. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 16-Jul-2021.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.26 952 | Theorem *2.26 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 104. See pm2.27 42. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.63 953 | Theorem *2.63 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.64 954 | Theorem *2.64 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.42 955 | Theorem *2.42 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 106. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.11g 956 | A general instance of Theorem *5.11 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 123. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.11 957 | Theorem *5.11 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 123. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.12 958 | Theorem *5.12 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 123. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∨ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.14 959 | Theorem *5.14 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 123. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∨ (𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.13 960 | Theorem *5.13 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 123. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∨ (𝜓 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.55 961 | Theorem *5.55 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜑) ∨ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.72 962 | Implication in terms of biconditional and disjunction. Theorem *4.72 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 121. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | imimorb 963 | Simplify an implication between implications. (Contributed by Paul Chapman, 17-Nov-2012.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Apr-2013.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜓 → 𝜒) → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | oibabs 964 | Absorption of disjunction into equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 6-Aug-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Nov-2013.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | orbidi 965 | Disjunction distributes over the biconditional. An axiom of system DS in Vladimir Lifschitz, "On calculational proofs" (1998), http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.25.3384. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.7 966 | Disjunction distributes over the biconditional. Theorem *5.7 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. This theorem is similar to orbidi 965. (Contributed by Roy F. Longton, 21-Jun-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜒 ∨ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))) | ||
This section gathers theorems of propositional calculus which use (either in their statement or proof) mixed connectives (at least conjunction and disjunction). As noted in the "note on definitions" in the section comment for logical equivalence, some theorem statements may contain for instance only conjunction or only disjunction, but both definitions are used in their proofs to make them shorter (this is exemplified in orim12d 977 versus orim12dALT 922). These theorems are mostly grouped at the beginning of this section. The family of theorems starting with animorl 990 focus on the relation between conjunction and disjunction and can be seen as the starting point of mixed connectives in statements. This sectioning is not rigorously true, since for instance the section begins with jaao 967 and related theorems. | ||
| Theorem | jaao 967 | Inference conjoining and disjoining the antecedents of two implications. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-1999.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜃 → (𝜏 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜏) → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | jaoa 968 | Inference disjoining and conjoining the antecedents of two implications. (Contributed by Stefan Allan, 1-Nov-2008.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜃 → (𝜏 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜃) → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | jaoian 969 | Inference disjoining the antecedents of two implications. (Contributed by NM, 23-Oct-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜃 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜃) ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | jaodan 970 | Deduction disjoining the antecedents of two implications. (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃)) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | mpjaodan 971 | Eliminate a disjunction in a deduction. A translation of natural deduction rule ∨ E (∨ elimination), see natded 30549. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 29-May-2016.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | pm3.44 972 | Theorem *3.44 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 113. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2013.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜓 → 𝜑) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜑)) → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | jao 973 | Disjunction of antecedents. Compare Theorem *3.44 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 113. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Apr-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜒 → 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | jaob 974 | Disjunction of antecedents. Compare Theorem *4.77 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 121. (Contributed by NM, 30-May-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 9-Dec-2012.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.77 975 | Theorem *4.77 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 121. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜓 → 𝜑) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜑)) ↔ ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | pm3.48 976 | Theorem *3.48 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 114. (Contributed by NM, 28-Jan-1997.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | orim12d 977 | Disjoin antecedents and consequents in a deduction. See orim12dALT 922 for a proof which does not depend on df-an 400. (Contributed by NM, 10-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃) → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | orim1d 978 | Disjoin antecedents and consequents in a deduction. (Contributed by NM, 23-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃) → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | orim2d 979 | Disjoin antecedents and consequents in a deduction. (Contributed by NM, 23-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜃 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜃 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | orim2 980 | Axiom *1.6 (Sum) of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 97. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.38 981 | Theorem *2.38 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 105. (Contributed by NM, 6-Mar-2008.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜑) → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.36 982 | Theorem *2.36 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 105. (Contributed by NM, 6-Mar-2008.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.37 983 | Theorem *2.37 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 105. (Contributed by NM, 6-Mar-2008.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜑) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.81 984 | Theorem *2.81 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜃)))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.8 985 | Theorem *2.8 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ((¬ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.73 986 | Theorem *2.73 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.74 987 | Theorem *2.74 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜑) → (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.82 988 | Theorem *2.82 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 108. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) → (((𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜒) ∨ 𝜃) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.39 989 | Theorem *4.39 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 118. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | animorl 990 | Conjunction implies disjunction with one common formula (1/4). (Contributed by BJ, 4-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | animorr 991 | Conjunction implies disjunction with one common formula (2/4). (Contributed by BJ, 4-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | animorlr 992 | Conjunction implies disjunction with one common formula (3/4). (Contributed by BJ, 4-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | animorrl 993 | Conjunction implies disjunction with one common formula (4/4). (Contributed by BJ, 4-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | ianor 994 | Negated conjunction in terms of disjunction (De Morgan's law). Theorem *4.51 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | anor 995 | Conjunction in terms of disjunction (De Morgan's law). Theorem *4.5 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | ioran 996 | Negated disjunction in terms of conjunction (De Morgan's law). Compare Theorem *4.56 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.52 997 | Theorem *4.52 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.53 998 | Theorem *4.53 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.54 999 | Theorem *4.54 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.55 1000 | Theorem *4.55 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |