| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 101 of 505) | < 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: | (1-31128) |
(31129-32651) |
(32652-50417) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | dfac8c 10001* | If the union of a set is well-orderable, then the set has a choice function. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 5-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (∃𝑟 𝑟 We ∪ 𝐴 → ∃𝑓∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑧 ≠ ∅ → (𝑓‘𝑧) ∈ 𝑧))) | ||
| Theorem | ac10ct 10002* | A proof of the well-ordering theorem weth 10463, an Axiom of Choice equivalent, restricted to sets dominated by some ordinal (in particular finite sets and countable sets), proven in ZF without AC. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 5-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦 ∈ On 𝐴 ≼ 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 𝑥 We 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | ween 10003* | A set is numerable iff it can be well-ordered. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 5-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ dom card ↔ ∃𝑟 𝑟 We 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | ac5num 10004* | A version of ac5b 10446 with the choice as a hypothesis. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 27-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((∪ 𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ ¬ ∅ ∈ 𝐴) → ∃𝑓(𝑓:𝐴⟶∪ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑓‘𝑥) ∈ 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | ondomen 10005 | If a set is dominated by an ordinal, then it is numerable. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 5-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ dom card) | ||
| Theorem | numdom 10006 | A set dominated by a numerable set is numerable. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ dom card) | ||
| Theorem | ssnum 10007 | A subset of a numerable set is numerable. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ dom card) | ||
| Theorem | onssnum 10008 | All subsets of the ordinals are numerable. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 12-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐴 ⊆ On) → 𝐴 ∈ dom card) | ||
| Theorem | indcardi 10009* | Indirect strong induction on the cardinality of a finite or numerable set. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 24-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ dom card) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑅 ≼ 𝑇 ∧ ∀𝑦(𝑆 ≺ 𝑅 → 𝜒)) → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑅 = 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝑅 = 𝑇) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | acnrcl 10010 | Reverse closure for the choice set predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐴 → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | acneq 10011 | Equality theorem for the choice set function. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐶 → AC 𝐴 = AC 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | isacn 10012* | The property of being a choice set of length 𝐴. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑓 ∈ ((𝒫 𝑋 ∖ {∅}) ↑m 𝐴)∃𝑔∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑔‘𝑥) ∈ (𝑓‘𝑥))) | ||
| Theorem | acni 10013* | The property of being a choice set of length 𝐴. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐴 ∧ 𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝒫 𝑋 ∖ {∅})) → ∃𝑔∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑔‘𝑥) ∈ (𝐹‘𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | acni2 10014* | The property of being a choice set of length 𝐴. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐵 ⊆ 𝑋 ∧ 𝐵 ≠ ∅)) → ∃𝑔(𝑔:𝐴⟶𝑋 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑔‘𝑥) ∈ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | acni3 10015* | The property of being a choice set of length 𝐴. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑦 = (𝑔‘𝑥) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 𝜑) → ∃𝑔(𝑔:𝐴⟶𝑋 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | acnlem 10016* | Construct a mapping satisfying the consequent of isacn 10012. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ (𝑓‘𝑥)) → ∃𝑔∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑔‘𝑥) ∈ (𝑓‘𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | numacn 10017 | A well-orderable set has choice sequences of every length. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑋 ∈ dom card → 𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | finacn 10018 | Every set has finite choice sequences. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ Fin → AC 𝐴 = V) | ||
| Theorem | acndom 10019 | A set with long choice sequences also has shorter choice sequences, where "shorter" here means the new index set is dominated by the old index set. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ≼ 𝐵 → (𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐵 → 𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | acnnum 10020 | A set 𝑋 which has choice sequences on it of length 𝒫 𝑋 is well-orderable (and hence has choice sequences of every length). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ AC 𝒫 𝑋 ↔ 𝑋 ∈ dom card) | ||
| Theorem | acnen 10021 | The class of choice sets of length 𝐴 is a cardinal invariant. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ≈ 𝐵 → AC 𝐴 = AC 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | acndom2 10022 | A set smaller than one with choice sequences of length 𝐴 also has choice sequences of length 𝐴. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≼ 𝑌 → (𝑌 ∈ AC 𝐴 → 𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | acnen2 10023 | The class of sets with choice sequences of length 𝐴 is a cardinal invariant. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≈ 𝑌 → (𝑋 ∈ AC 𝐴 ↔ 𝑌 ∈ AC 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | fodomacn 10024 | A version of fodom 10491 that doesn't require the Axiom of Choice ax-ac 10427. If 𝐴 has choice sequences of length 𝐵, then any surjection from 𝐴 to 𝐵 can be inverted to an injection the other way. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ AC 𝐵 → (𝐹:𝐴–onto→𝐵 → 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | fodomnum 10025 | A version of fodom 10491 that doesn't require the Axiom of Choice ax-ac 10427. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 28-Feb-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ dom card → (𝐹:𝐴–onto→𝐵 → 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | fonum 10026 | A surjection maps numerable sets to numerable sets. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 30-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ 𝐹:𝐴–onto→𝐵) → 𝐵 ∈ dom card) | ||
| Theorem | numwdom 10027 | A surjection maps numerable sets to numerable sets. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 27-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ 𝐵 ≼* 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ dom card) | ||
| Theorem | fodomfi2 10028 | Onto functions define dominance when a finite number of choices need to be made. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 28-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ Fin ∧ 𝐹:𝐴–onto→𝐵) → 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | wdomfil 10029 | Weak dominance agrees with normal for finite left sets. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 28-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 5-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ Fin → (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 ↔ 𝑋 ≼ 𝑌)) | ||
| Theorem | infpwfien 10030 | Any infinite well-orderable set is equinumerous to its set of finite subsets. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 18-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ ω ≼ 𝐴) → (𝒫 𝐴 ∩ Fin) ≈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | inffien 10031 | The set of finite intersections of an infinite well-orderable set is equinumerous to the set itself. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 18-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ ω ≼ 𝐴) → (fi‘𝐴) ≈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | wdomnumr 10032 | Weak dominance agrees with normal for numerable right sets. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 28-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 5-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ dom card → (𝐴 ≼* 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ≼ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | alephfnon 10033 | The aleph function is a function on the class of ordinal numbers. (Contributed by NM, 21-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 13-Sep-2013.) |
| ⊢ ℵ Fn On | ||
| Theorem | aleph0 10034 | The first infinite cardinal number, discovered by Georg Cantor in 1873, has the same size as the set of natural numbers ω (and under our particular definition is also equal to it). In the literature, the argument of the aleph function is often written as a subscript, and the first aleph is written ℵ0. Exercise 3 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 91. Also Definition 12(i) of [Suppes] p. 228. From Moshé Machover, Set Theory, Logic, and Their Limitations, p. 95: "Aleph ... the first letter in the Hebrew alphabet ... is also the first letter of the Hebrew word ... (einsoph, meaning infinity), which is a cabbalistic appellation of the deity. The notation is due to Cantor, who was deeply interested in mysticism." (Contributed by NM, 21-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 13-Sep-2013.) |
| ⊢ (ℵ‘∅) = ω | ||
| Theorem | alephlim 10035* | Value of the aleph function at a limit ordinal. Definition 12(iii) of [Suppes] p. 91. (Contributed by NM, 21-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 13-Sep-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ Lim 𝐴) → (ℵ‘𝐴) = ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (ℵ‘𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | alephsuc 10036 | Value of the aleph function at a successor ordinal. Definition 12(ii) of [Suppes] p. 91. Here we express the successor aleph in terms of the Hartogs function df-har 9503, which gives the smallest ordinal that strictly dominates its argument (or the supremum of all ordinals that are dominated by the argument). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 13-Sep-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → (ℵ‘suc 𝐴) = (har‘(ℵ‘𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | alephon 10037 | An aleph is an ordinal number. (Contributed by NM, 10-Nov-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 13-Sep-2013.) |
| ⊢ (ℵ‘𝐴) ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | alephcard 10038 | Every aleph is a cardinal number. Theorem 65 of [Suppes] p. 229. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 2-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (card‘(ℵ‘𝐴)) = (ℵ‘𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | alephnbtwn 10039 | No cardinal can be sandwiched between an aleph and its successor aleph. Theorem 67 of [Suppes] p. 229. (Contributed by NM, 10-Nov-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((card‘𝐵) = 𝐵 → ¬ ((ℵ‘𝐴) ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (ℵ‘suc 𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | alephnbtwn2 10040 | No set has equinumerosity between an aleph and its successor aleph. (Contributed by NM, 3-Nov-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 2-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ((ℵ‘𝐴) ≺ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ≺ (ℵ‘suc 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | alephordilem1 10041 | Lemma for alephordi 10042. (Contributed by NM, 23-Oct-2009.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → (ℵ‘𝐴) ≺ (ℵ‘suc 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | alephordi 10042 | Strict ordering property of the aleph function. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 2-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ On → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (ℵ‘𝐴) ≺ (ℵ‘𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | alephord 10043 | Ordering property of the aleph function. (Contributed by NM, 26-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ (ℵ‘𝐴) ≺ (ℵ‘𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | alephord2 10044 | Ordering property of the aleph function. Theorem 8A(a) of [Enderton] p. 213 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 3-Nov-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ (ℵ‘𝐴) ∈ (ℵ‘𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | alephord2i 10045 | Ordering property of the aleph function. Theorem 66 of [Suppes] p. 229. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ On → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (ℵ‘𝐴) ∈ (ℵ‘𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | alephord3 10046 | Ordering property of the aleph function. (Contributed by NM, 11-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ↔ (ℵ‘𝐴) ⊆ (ℵ‘𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | alephsucdom 10047 | A set dominated by an aleph is strictly dominated by its successor aleph and vice-versa. (Contributed by NM, 3-Nov-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 2-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ On → (𝐴 ≼ (ℵ‘𝐵) ↔ 𝐴 ≺ (ℵ‘suc 𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | alephsuc2 10048* | An alternate representation of a successor aleph. The aleph function is the function obtained from the hartogs 9490 function by transfinite recursion, starting from ω. Using this theorem we could define the aleph function with {𝑧 ∈ On ∣ 𝑧 ≼ 𝑥} in place of ∩ {𝑧 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≺ 𝑧} in df-aleph 9910. (Contributed by NM, 3-Nov-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 2-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → (ℵ‘suc 𝐴) = {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≼ (ℵ‘𝐴)}) | ||
| Theorem | alephdom 10049 | Relationship between inclusion of ordinal numbers and dominance of infinite initial ordinals. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 23-Oct-2009.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ↔ (ℵ‘𝐴) ≼ (ℵ‘𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | alephgeom 10050 | Every aleph is greater than or equal to the set of natural numbers. (Contributed by NM, 11-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On ↔ ω ⊆ (ℵ‘𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | alephislim 10051 | Every aleph is a limit ordinal. (Contributed by NM, 11-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On ↔ Lim (ℵ‘𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | aleph11 10052 | The aleph function is one-to-one. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-2004.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → ((ℵ‘𝐴) = (ℵ‘𝐵) ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | alephf1 10053 | The aleph function is a one-to-one mapping from the ordinals to the infinite cardinals. See also alephf1ALT 10071. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 2-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ ℵ:On–1-1→On | ||
| Theorem | alephsdom 10054 | If an ordinal is smaller than an initial ordinal, it is strictly dominated by it. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 24-Oct-2009.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 20-Sep-2014.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → (𝐴 ∈ (ℵ‘𝐵) ↔ 𝐴 ≺ (ℵ‘𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | alephdom2 10055 | A dominated initial ordinal is included. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 24-Oct-2009.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → ((ℵ‘𝐴) ⊆ 𝐵 ↔ (ℵ‘𝐴) ≼ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | alephle 10056 | The argument of the aleph function is less than or equal to its value. Exercise 2 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 91. (Later, in alephfp2 10077, we will that equality can sometimes hold.) (Contributed by NM, 9-Nov-2003.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 22-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → 𝐴 ⊆ (ℵ‘𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | cardaleph 10057* | Given any transfinite cardinal number 𝐴, there is exactly one aleph that is equal to it. Here we compute that aleph explicitly. (Contributed by NM, 9-Nov-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 2-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((ω ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ (card‘𝐴) = 𝐴) → 𝐴 = (ℵ‘∩ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝐴 ⊆ (ℵ‘𝑥)})) | ||
| Theorem | cardalephex 10058* | Every transfinite cardinal is an aleph and vice-versa. Theorem 8A(b) of [Enderton] p. 213 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 5-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ (ω ⊆ 𝐴 → ((card‘𝐴) = 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑥 ∈ On 𝐴 = (ℵ‘𝑥))) | ||
| Theorem | infenaleph 10059* | An infinite numerable set is equinumerous to an infinite initial ordinal. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 23-Oct-2009.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 29-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ ω ≼ 𝐴) → ∃𝑥 ∈ ran ℵ𝑥 ≈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | isinfcard 10060 | Two ways to express the property of being a transfinite cardinal. (Contributed by NM, 9-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ ((ω ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ (card‘𝐴) = 𝐴) ↔ 𝐴 ∈ ran ℵ) | ||
| Theorem | iscard3 10061 | Two ways to express the property of being a cardinal number. (Contributed by NM, 9-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ ((card‘𝐴) = 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ (ω ∪ ran ℵ)) | ||
| Theorem | cardnum 10062 | Two ways to express the class of all cardinal numbers, which consists of the finite ordinals in ω plus the transfinite alephs. (Contributed by NM, 10-Sep-2004.) |
| ⊢ {𝑥 ∣ (card‘𝑥) = 𝑥} = (ω ∪ ran ℵ) | ||
| Theorem | alephinit 10063* | An infinite initial ordinal is characterized by the property of being initial - that is, it is a subset of any dominating ordinal. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 29-Oct-2009.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 20-Sep-2014.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ ω ⊆ 𝐴) → (𝐴 ∈ ran ℵ ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ On (𝐴 ≼ 𝑥 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝑥))) | ||
| Theorem | carduniima 10064 | The union of the image of a mapping to cardinals is a cardinal. Proposition 11.16 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 104. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2004.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (𝐹:𝐴⟶(ω ∪ ran ℵ) → ∪ (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ∈ (ω ∪ ran ℵ))) | ||
| Theorem | cardinfima 10065* | If a mapping to cardinals has an infinite value, then the union of its image is an infinite cardinal. Corollary 11.17 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 104. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2004.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → ((𝐹:𝐴⟶(ω ∪ ran ℵ) ∧ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐹‘𝑥) ∈ ran ℵ) → ∪ (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ∈ ran ℵ)) | ||
| Theorem | alephiso 10066 | Aleph is an order isomorphism of the class of ordinal numbers onto the class of infinite cardinals. Definition 10.27 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-2004.) |
| ⊢ ℵ Isom E , E (On, {𝑥 ∣ (ω ⊆ 𝑥 ∧ (card‘𝑥) = 𝑥)}) | ||
| Theorem | alephprc 10067 | The class of all transfinite cardinal numbers (the range of the aleph function) is a proper class. Proposition 10.26 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 11-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ran ℵ ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | alephsson 10068 | The class of transfinite cardinals (the range of the aleph function) is a subclass of the class of ordinal numbers. (Contributed by NM, 11-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ ran ℵ ⊆ On | ||
| Theorem | unialeph 10069 | The union of the class of transfinite cardinals (the range of the aleph function) is the class of ordinal numbers. (Contributed by NM, 11-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ ∪ ran ℵ = On | ||
| Theorem | alephsmo 10070 | The aleph function is strictly monotone. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-Mar-2013.) |
| ⊢ Smo ℵ | ||
| Theorem | alephf1ALT 10071 | Alternate proof of alephf1 10053. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-Mar-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ℵ:On–1-1→On | ||
| Theorem | alephfplem1 10072 | Lemma for alephfp 10076. (Contributed by NM, 6-Nov-2004.) |
| ⊢ 𝐻 = (rec(ℵ, ω) ↾ ω) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐻‘∅) ∈ ran ℵ | ||
| Theorem | alephfplem2 10073* | Lemma for alephfp 10076. (Contributed by NM, 6-Nov-2004.) |
| ⊢ 𝐻 = (rec(ℵ, ω) ↾ ω) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑤 ∈ ω → (𝐻‘suc 𝑤) = (ℵ‘(𝐻‘𝑤))) | ||
| Theorem | alephfplem3 10074* | Lemma for alephfp 10076. (Contributed by NM, 6-Nov-2004.) |
| ⊢ 𝐻 = (rec(ℵ, ω) ↾ ω) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑣 ∈ ω → (𝐻‘𝑣) ∈ ran ℵ) | ||
| Theorem | alephfplem4 10075 | Lemma for alephfp 10076. (Contributed by NM, 5-Nov-2004.) |
| ⊢ 𝐻 = (rec(ℵ, ω) ↾ ω) ⇒ ⊢ ∪ (𝐻 “ ω) ∈ ran ℵ | ||
| Theorem | alephfp 10076 | The aleph function has a fixed point. Similar to Proposition 11.18 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 104, except that we construct an actual example of a fixed point rather than just showing its existence. See alephfp2 10077 for an abbreviated version just showing existence. (Contributed by NM, 6-Nov-2004.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐻 = (rec(ℵ, ω) ↾ ω) ⇒ ⊢ (ℵ‘∪ (𝐻 “ ω)) = ∪ (𝐻 “ ω) | ||
| Theorem | alephfp2 10077 | The aleph function has at least one fixed point. Proposition 11.18 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 104. See alephfp 10076 for an actual example of a fixed point. Compare the inequality alephle 10056 that holds in general. Note that if 𝑥 is a fixed point, then ℵ‘ℵ‘ℵ‘... ℵ‘𝑥 = 𝑥. (Contributed by NM, 6-Nov-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥 ∈ On (ℵ‘𝑥) = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | alephval3 10078* | An alternate way to express the value of the aleph function: it is the least infinite cardinal different from all values at smaller arguments. Definition of aleph in [Enderton] p. 212 and definition of aleph in [BellMachover] p. 490 . (Contributed by NM, 16-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → (ℵ‘𝐴) = ∩ {𝑥 ∣ ((card‘𝑥) = 𝑥 ∧ ω ⊆ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ¬ 𝑥 = (ℵ‘𝑦))}) | ||
| Theorem | alephsucpw2 10079 | The power set of an aleph is not strictly dominated by the successor aleph. (The Generalized Continuum Hypothesis says they are equinumerous, see gch3 10645 or gchaleph2 10641.) The transposed form alephsucpw 10539 cannot be proven without the AC, and is in fact equivalent to it. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 2-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝒫 (ℵ‘𝐴) ≺ (ℵ‘suc 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | mappwen 10080 | Power rule for cardinal arithmetic. Theorem 11.21 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 106. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Mar-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 27-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ (((𝐵 ∈ dom card ∧ ω ≼ 𝐵) ∧ (2o ≼ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ≼ 𝒫 𝐵)) → (𝐴 ↑m 𝐵) ≈ 𝒫 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | finnisoeu 10081* | A finite totally ordered set has a unique order isomorphism to a finite ordinal. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 16-Nov-2014.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ Fin) → ∃!𝑓 𝑓 Isom E , 𝑅 ((card‘𝐴), 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | iunfictbso 10082 | Countability of a countable union of finite sets with a strict (not globally well) order fulfilling the choice role. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 16-Nov-2014.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ≼ ω ∧ 𝐴 ⊆ Fin ∧ 𝐵 Or ∪ 𝐴) → ∪ 𝐴 ≼ ω) | ||
| Syntax | wac 10083 | Wff for an abbreviation of the axiom of choice. |
| wff CHOICE | ||
| Definition | df-ac 10084* |
The expression CHOICE will be used as a
readable shorthand for any
form of the axiom of choice; all concrete forms are long, cryptic, have
dummy variables, or all three, making it useful to have a short name.
Similar to the Axiom of Choice (first form) of [Enderton] p. 49.
There is a slight problem with taking the exact form of ax-ac 10427 as our definition, because the equivalence to more standard forms (dfac2 10099) requires the Axiom of Regularity, which we often try to avoid. Thus, we take the first of the "textbook forms" as the definition and derive the form of ax-ac 10427 itself as dfac0 10101. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 22-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (CHOICE ↔ ∀𝑥∃𝑓(𝑓 ⊆ 𝑥 ∧ 𝑓 Fn dom 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | aceq1 10085* | Equivalence of two versions of the Axiom of Choice ax-ac 10427. The proof uses neither AC nor the Axiom of Regularity. The right-hand side expresses our AC with the fewest number of different variables. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢) ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑧∀𝑤((𝑧 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥) → ∃𝑥∀𝑧(∃𝑥((𝑧 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥) ∧ (𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦)) ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑥))) | ||
| Theorem | aceq0 10086* | Equivalence of two versions of the Axiom of Choice. The proof uses neither AC nor the Axiom of Regularity. The right-hand side is our original ax-ac 10427. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢) ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑧∀𝑤((𝑧 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥) → ∃𝑣∀𝑢(∃𝑡((𝑢 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑡) ∧ (𝑢 ∈ 𝑡 ∧ 𝑡 ∈ 𝑦)) ↔ 𝑢 = 𝑣))) | ||
| Theorem | aceq2 10087* | Equivalence of two versions of the Axiom of Choice. The proof uses neither AC nor the Axiom of Regularity. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢) ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ ∅ → ∃!𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑣 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑣))) | ||
| Theorem | aceq3lem 10088* | Lemma for dfac3 10089. (Contributed by NM, 2-Apr-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑤 ∈ dom 𝑦 ↦ (𝑓‘{𝑢 ∣ 𝑤𝑦𝑢})) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥∃𝑓∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ ∅ → (𝑓‘𝑧) ∈ 𝑧) → ∃𝑓(𝑓 ⊆ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑓 Fn dom 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | dfac3 10089* | Equivalence of two versions of the Axiom of Choice. The left-hand side is defined as the Axiom of Choice (first form) of [Enderton] p. 49. The right-hand side is the Axiom of Choice of [TakeutiZaring] p. 83. The proof does not depend on AC. (Contributed by NM, 24-Mar-2004.) (Revised by Stefan O'Rear, 22-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (CHOICE ↔ ∀𝑥∃𝑓∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ ∅ → (𝑓‘𝑧) ∈ 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | dfac4 10090* | Equivalence of two versions of the Axiom of Choice. The right-hand side is Axiom AC of [BellMachover] p. 488. The proof does not depend on AC. (Contributed by NM, 24-Mar-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (CHOICE ↔ ∀𝑥∃𝑓(𝑓 Fn 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ ∅ → (𝑓‘𝑧) ∈ 𝑧))) | ||
| Theorem | dfac5lem1 10091* | Lemma for dfac5 10096. (Contributed by NM, 12-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑣 𝑣 ∈ (({𝑤} × 𝑤) ∩ 𝑦) ↔ ∃!𝑔(𝑔 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 〈𝑤, 𝑔〉 ∈ 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | dfac5lem2 10092* | Lemma for dfac5 10096. (Contributed by NM, 12-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑢 ∣ (𝑢 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∃𝑡 ∈ ℎ 𝑢 = ({𝑡} × 𝑡))} ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝑤, 𝑔〉 ∈ ∪ 𝐴 ↔ (𝑤 ∈ ℎ ∧ 𝑔 ∈ 𝑤)) | ||
| Theorem | dfac5lem3 10093* | Lemma for dfac5 10096. (Contributed by NM, 12-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑢 ∣ (𝑢 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∃𝑡 ∈ ℎ 𝑢 = ({𝑡} × 𝑡))} ⇒ ⊢ (({𝑤} × 𝑤) ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝑤 ≠ ∅ ∧ 𝑤 ∈ ℎ)) | ||
| Theorem | dfac5lem4 10094* | Lemma for dfac5 10096. (Contributed by NM, 11-Apr-2004.) Avoid ax-11 2192. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 23-Jun-2025.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑢 ∣ (𝑢 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∃𝑡 ∈ ℎ 𝑢 = ({𝑡} × 𝑡))} & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥((∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 𝑧 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ 𝑤 → (𝑧 ∩ 𝑤) = ∅)) → ∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∃!𝑣 𝑣 ∈ (𝑧 ∩ 𝑦))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑣 𝑣 ∈ (𝑧 ∩ 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | dfac5lem5 10095* | Lemma for dfac5 10096. (Contributed by NM, 12-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑢 ∣ (𝑢 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∃𝑡 ∈ ℎ 𝑢 = ({𝑡} × 𝑡))} & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥((∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 𝑧 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ 𝑤 → (𝑧 ∩ 𝑤) = ∅)) → ∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∃!𝑣 𝑣 ∈ (𝑧 ∩ 𝑦))) & ⊢ 𝐵 = (∪ 𝐴 ∩ 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑓∀𝑤 ∈ ℎ (𝑤 ≠ ∅ → (𝑓‘𝑤) ∈ 𝑤)) | ||
| Theorem | dfac5 10096* | Equivalence of two versions of the Axiom of Choice. The right-hand side is Theorem 6M(4) of [Enderton] p. 151 and asserts that given a family of mutually disjoint nonempty sets, a set exists containing exactly one member from each set in the family. The proof does not depend on AC. (Contributed by NM, 11-Apr-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 17-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (CHOICE ↔ ∀𝑥((∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 𝑧 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ 𝑤 → (𝑧 ∩ 𝑤) = ∅)) → ∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∃!𝑣 𝑣 ∈ (𝑧 ∩ 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | dfac2a 10097* | Our Axiom of Choice (in the form of ac3 10430) implies the Axiom of Choice (first form) of [Enderton] p. 49. The proof uses neither AC nor the Axiom of Regularity. See dfac2b 10098 for the converse (which does use the Axiom of Regularity). (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ ∅ → ∃!𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑣 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑣)) → CHOICE) | ||
| Theorem | dfac2b 10098* | Axiom of Choice (first form) of [Enderton] p. 49 implies our Axiom of Choice (in the form of ac3 10430). The proof does not make use of AC. Note that the Axiom of Regularity is used by the proof. Specifically, elneq 9547 and preleq 9569 that are referenced in the proof each make use of Regularity for their derivations. (The reverse implication can be derived without using Regularity; see dfac2a 10097.) (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) (Revised by AV, 16-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (CHOICE → ∀𝑥∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ ∅ → ∃!𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑣 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑣))) | ||
| Theorem | dfac2 10099* | Axiom of Choice (first form) of [Enderton] p. 49 corresponds to our Axiom of Choice (in the form of ac3 10430). The proof does not make use of AC, but the Axiom of Regularity is used (by applying dfac2b 10098). (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) (Revised by AV, 16-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (CHOICE ↔ ∀𝑥∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑧 ≠ ∅ → ∃!𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑣 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑣))) | ||
| Theorem | dfac7 10100* | Equivalence of the Axiom of Choice (first form) of [Enderton] p. 49 and our Axiom of Choice (in the form of ac2 10429). The proof does not depend on AC but does depend on the Axiom of Regularity. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 17-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (CHOICE ↔ ∀𝑥∃𝑦∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑣 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑦 (𝑧 ∈ 𝑢 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑢)) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |