P. 105 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 10401-10500   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	ttukeylem5 10401*	Lemma for ttukey 10406. The 𝐺 function forms a (transfinitely long) chain of inclusions. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(card‘(∪ 𝐴 ∖ 𝐵))–1-1-onto→(∪ 𝐴 ∖ 𝐵))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝒫 𝑥 ∩ Fin) ⊆ 𝐴))    &   ⊢ 𝐺 = recs((𝑧 ∈ V ↦ if(dom 𝑧 = ∪ dom 𝑧, if(dom 𝑧 = ∅, 𝐵, ∪ ran 𝑧), ((𝑧‘∪ dom 𝑧) ∪ if(((𝑧‘∪ dom 𝑧) ∪ {(𝐹‘∪ dom 𝑧)}) ∈ 𝐴, {(𝐹‘∪ dom 𝑧)}, ∅)))))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝐶 ∈ On ∧ 𝐷 ∈ On ∧ 𝐶 ⊆ 𝐷)) → (𝐺‘𝐶) ⊆ (𝐺‘𝐷))
Theorem	ttukeylem6 10402*	Lemma for ttukey 10406. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(card‘(∪ 𝐴 ∖ 𝐵))–1-1-onto→(∪ 𝐴 ∖ 𝐵))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝒫 𝑥 ∩ Fin) ⊆ 𝐴))    &   ⊢ 𝐺 = recs((𝑧 ∈ V ↦ if(dom 𝑧 = ∪ dom 𝑧, if(dom 𝑧 = ∅, 𝐵, ∪ ran 𝑧), ((𝑧‘∪ dom 𝑧) ∪ if(((𝑧‘∪ dom 𝑧) ∪ {(𝐹‘∪ dom 𝑧)}) ∈ 𝐴, {(𝐹‘∪ dom 𝑧)}, ∅)))))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ suc (card‘(∪ 𝐴 ∖ 𝐵))) → (𝐺‘𝐶) ∈ 𝐴)
Theorem	ttukeylem7 10403*	Lemma for ttukey 10406. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(card‘(∪ 𝐴 ∖ 𝐵))–1-1-onto→(∪ 𝐴 ∖ 𝐵))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝒫 𝑥 ∩ Fin) ⊆ 𝐴))    &   ⊢ 𝐺 = recs((𝑧 ∈ V ↦ if(dom 𝑧 = ∪ dom 𝑧, if(dom 𝑧 = ∅, 𝐵, ∪ ran 𝑧), ((𝑧‘∪ dom 𝑧) ∪ if(((𝑧‘∪ dom 𝑧) ∪ {(𝐹‘∪ dom 𝑧)}) ∈ 𝐴, {(𝐹‘∪ dom 𝑧)}, ∅)))))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐵 ⊆ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ¬ 𝑥 ⊊ 𝑦))
Theorem	ttukey2g 10404*	The Teichmüller-Tukey Lemma ttukey 10406 with a slightly stronger conclusion: we can set up the maximal element of 𝐴 so that it also contains some given 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 as a subset. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.)
⊢ ((∪ 𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝒫 𝑥 ∩ Fin) ⊆ 𝐴)) → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐵 ⊆ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ¬ 𝑥 ⊊ 𝑦))
Theorem	ttukeyg 10405*	The Teichmüller-Tukey Lemma ttukey 10406 stated with the "choice" as an antecedent (the hypothesis ∪ 𝐴 ∈ dom card says that ∪ 𝐴 is well-orderable). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.)
⊢ ((∪ 𝐴 ∈ dom card ∧ 𝐴 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝒫 𝑥 ∩ Fin) ⊆ 𝐴)) → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ¬ 𝑥 ⊊ 𝑦)
Theorem	ttukey 10406*	The Teichmüller-Tukey Lemma, an Axiom of Choice equivalent. If 𝐴 is a nonempty collection of finite character, then 𝐴 has a maximal element with respect to inclusion. Here "finite character" means that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 iff every finite subset of 𝑥 is in 𝐴. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (𝒫 𝑥 ∩ Fin) ⊆ 𝐴)) → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ¬ 𝑥 ⊊ 𝑦)
Theorem	axdclem 10407*	Lemma for axdc 10409. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jan-2013.)
⊢ 𝐹 = (rec((𝑦 ∈ V ↦ (𝑔‘{𝑧 ∣ 𝑦𝑥𝑧})), 𝑠) ↾ ω)    ⇒   ⊢ ((∀𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 dom 𝑥(𝑦 ≠ ∅ → (𝑔‘𝑦) ∈ 𝑦) ∧ ran 𝑥 ⊆ dom 𝑥 ∧ ∃𝑧(𝐹‘𝐾)𝑥𝑧) → (𝐾 ∈ ω → (𝐹‘𝐾)𝑥(𝐹‘suc 𝐾)))
Theorem	axdclem2 10408*	Lemma for axdc 10409. Using the full Axiom of Choice, we can construct a choice function 𝑔 on 𝒫 dom 𝑥. From this, we can build a sequence 𝐹 starting at any value 𝑠 ∈ dom 𝑥 by repeatedly applying 𝑔 to the set (𝐹‘𝑥) (where 𝑥 is the value from the previous iteration). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jan-2013.)
⊢ 𝐹 = (rec((𝑦 ∈ V ↦ (𝑔‘{𝑧 ∣ 𝑦𝑥𝑧})), 𝑠) ↾ ω)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑧 𝑠𝑥𝑧 → (ran 𝑥 ⊆ dom 𝑥 → ∃𝑓∀𝑛 ∈ ω (𝑓‘𝑛)𝑥(𝑓‘suc 𝑛)))
Theorem	axdc 10409*	This theorem derives ax-dc 10334 using ax-ac 10347 and ax-inf 9528. Thus, AC implies DC, but not vice-versa (so that ZFC is strictly stronger than ZF+DC). (New usage is discouraged.) (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jan-2013.)
⊢ ((∃𝑦∃𝑧 𝑦𝑥𝑧 ∧ ran 𝑥 ⊆ dom 𝑥) → ∃𝑓∀𝑛 ∈ ω (𝑓‘𝑛)𝑥(𝑓‘suc 𝑛))
Theorem	fodomg 10410	An onto function implies dominance of domain over range. Lemma 10.20 of [Kunen] p. 30. This theorem uses the axiom of choice ac7g 10362. The axiom of choice is not needed for finite sets, see fodomfi 9196. See also fodomnum 9945. (Contributed by NM, 23-Jul-2004.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 20-May-2024.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐹:𝐴–onto→𝐵 → 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴))
Theorem	fodom 10411	An onto function implies dominance of domain over range. (Contributed by NM, 23-Jul-2004.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐹:𝐴–onto→𝐵 → 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴)
Theorem	dmct 10412	The domain of a countable set is countable. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 29-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (𝐴 ≼ ω → dom 𝐴 ≼ ω)
Theorem	rnct 10413	The range of a countable set is countable. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 29-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (𝐴 ≼ ω → ran 𝐴 ≼ ω)
Theorem	fodomb 10414*	Equivalence of an onto mapping and dominance for a nonempty set. Proposition 10.35 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 93. (Contributed by NM, 29-Jul-2004.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∃𝑓 𝑓:𝐴–onto→𝐵) ↔ (∅ ≺ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴))
Theorem	wdomac 10415	When assuming AC, weak and usual dominance coincide. It is not known if this is an AC equivalent. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 5-May-2015.)
⊢ (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 ↔ 𝑋 ≼ 𝑌)
Theorem	brdom3 10416*	Equivalence to a dominance relation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-2007.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ≼ 𝐵 ↔ ∃𝑓(∀𝑥∃*𝑦 𝑥𝑓𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑦𝑓𝑥))
Theorem	brdom5 10417*	An equivalence to a dominance relation. (Contributed by NM, 29-Mar-2007.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ≼ 𝐵 ↔ ∃𝑓(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∃*𝑦 𝑥𝑓𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑦𝑓𝑥))
Theorem	brdom4 10418*	An equivalence to a dominance relation. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-2007.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ≼ 𝐵 ↔ ∃𝑓(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥𝑓𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑦𝑓𝑥))
Theorem	brdom7disj 10419*	An equivalence to a dominance relation for disjoint sets. (Contributed by NM, 29-Mar-2007.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) = ∅    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ≼ 𝐵 ↔ ∃𝑓(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 {𝑥, 𝑦} ∈ 𝑓 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 {𝑦, 𝑥} ∈ 𝑓))
Theorem	brdom6disj 10420*	An equivalence to a dominance relation for disjoint sets. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2007.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) = ∅    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ≼ 𝐵 ↔ ∃𝑓(∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∃*𝑦{𝑥, 𝑦} ∈ 𝑓 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 {𝑦, 𝑥} ∈ 𝑓))
Theorem	fin71ac 10421	Once we allow AC, the "strongest" definition of finite set becomes equivalent to the "weakest" and the entire hierarchy collapses. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 29-Oct-2014.)
⊢ FinVII = Fin
Theorem	imadomg 10422	An image of a function under a set is dominated by the set. Proposition 10.34 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 92. (Contributed by NM, 23-Jul-2004.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (Fun 𝐹 → (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ≼ 𝐴))
Theorem	fimact 10423	The image by a function of a countable set is countable. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 27-Mar-2018.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ≼ ω ∧ Fun 𝐹) → (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ≼ ω)
Theorem	fnrndomg 10424	The range of a function is dominated by its domain. (Contributed by NM, 1-Sep-2004.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (𝐹 Fn 𝐴 → ran 𝐹 ≼ 𝐴))
Theorem	fnct 10425	If the domain of a function is countable, the function is countable. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 29-Dec-2016.)
⊢ ((𝐹 Fn 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ≼ ω) → 𝐹 ≼ ω)
Theorem	mptct 10426*	A countable mapping set is countable. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 29-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (𝐴 ≼ ω → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) ≼ ω)
Theorem	iunfo 10427*	Existence of an onto function from a disjoint union to a union. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 18-Jan-2014.)
⊢ 𝑇 = ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ({𝑥} × 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (2nd ↾ 𝑇):𝑇–onto→∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵
Theorem	iundom2g 10428*	An upper bound for the cardinality of a disjoint indexed union, with explicit choice principles. 𝐵 depends on 𝑥 and should be thought of as 𝐵(𝑥). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 1-Sep-2015.)
⊢ 𝑇 = ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ({𝑥} × 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) ∈ AC 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ≼ 𝐶)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ≼ (𝐴 × 𝐶))
Theorem	iundomg 10429*	An upper bound for the cardinality of an indexed union, with explicit choice principles. 𝐵 depends on 𝑥 and should be thought of as 𝐵(𝑥). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 1-Sep-2015.)
⊢ 𝑇 = ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ({𝑥} × 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) ∈ AC 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ≼ 𝐶)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 × 𝐶) ∈ AC ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ≼ (𝐴 × 𝐶))
Theorem	iundom 10430*	An upper bound for the cardinality of an indexed union. 𝐶 depends on 𝑥 and should be thought of as 𝐶(𝑥). (Contributed by NM, 26-Mar-2006.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐶 ≼ 𝐵) → ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐶 ≼ (𝐴 × 𝐵))
Theorem	unidom 10431*	An upper bound for the cardinality of a union. Theorem 10.47 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 98. (Contributed by NM, 25-Mar-2006.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 1-Sep-2015.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 ≼ 𝐵) → ∪ 𝐴 ≼ (𝐴 × 𝐵))
Theorem	uniimadom 10432*	An upper bound for the cardinality of the union of an image. Theorem 10.48 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 99. (Contributed by NM, 25-Mar-2006.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ ((Fun 𝐹 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐹‘𝑥) ≼ 𝐵) → ∪ (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ≼ (𝐴 × 𝐵))
Theorem	uniimadomf 10433*	An upper bound for the cardinality of the union of an image. Theorem 10.48 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 99. This version of uniimadom 10432 uses a bound-variable hypothesis in place of a distinct variable condition. (Contributed by NM, 26-Mar-2006.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐹    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ ((Fun 𝐹 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐹‘𝑥) ≼ 𝐵) → ∪ (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ≼ (𝐴 × 𝐵))
3.2.3  Cardinal number theorems using Axiom of Choice
Theorem	cardval 10434*	The value of the cardinal number function. Definition 10.4 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 85. See cardval2 9881 for a simpler version of its value. (Contributed by NM, 21-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (card‘𝐴) = ∩ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≈ 𝐴}
Theorem	cardid 10435	Any set is equinumerous to its cardinal number. Proposition 10.5 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 85. (Contributed by NM, 22-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (card‘𝐴) ≈ 𝐴
Theorem	cardidg 10436	Any set is equinumerous to its cardinal number. Closed theorem form of cardid 10435. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (card‘𝐴) ≈ 𝐴)
Theorem	cardidd 10437	Any set is equinumerous to its cardinal number. Deduction form of cardid 10435. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (card‘𝐴) ≈ 𝐴)
Theorem	cardf 10438	The cardinality function is a function with domain the well-orderable sets. Assuming AC, this is the universe. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Jun-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 13-Sep-2013.)
⊢ card:V⟶On
Theorem	carden 10439	Two sets are equinumerous iff their cardinal numbers are equal. This important theorem expresses the essential concept behind "cardinality" or "size". This theorem appears as Proposition 10.10 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 85, Theorem 7P of [Enderton] p. 197, and Theorem 9 of [Suppes] p. 242 (among others). The Axiom of Choice is required for its proof. Related theorems are hasheni 14252 and the finite-set-only hashen 14251. This theorem is also known as Hume's Principle. Gottlob Frege's two-volume Grundgesetze der Arithmetik used his Basic Law V to prove this theorem. Unfortunately Basic Law V caused Frege's system to be inconsistent because it was subject to Russell's paradox (see ru 3739). Later scholars have found that Frege primarily used Basic Law V to Hume's Principle. If Basic Law V is replaced by Hume's Principle in Frege's system, much of Frege's work is restored. Grundgesetze der Arithmetik, once Basic Law V is replaced, proves "Frege's theorem" (the Peano axioms of arithmetic can be derived in second-order logic from Hume's principle). See https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/frege-theorem 3739. We take a different approach, using first-order logic and ZFC, to prove the Peano axioms of arithmetic. The theory of cardinality can also be developed without AC by introducing "card" as a primitive notion and stating this theorem as an axiom, as is done with the axiom for cardinal numbers in [Suppes] p. 111. Finally, if we allow the Axiom of Regularity, we can avoid AC by defining the cardinal number of a set as the set of all sets equinumerous to it and having the least possible rank (see karden 9785). (Contributed by NM, 22-Oct-2003.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → ((card‘𝐴) = (card‘𝐵) ↔ 𝐴 ≈ 𝐵))
Theorem	cardeq0 10440	Only the empty set has cardinality zero. (Contributed by NM, 23-Apr-2004.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ((card‘𝐴) = ∅ ↔ 𝐴 = ∅))
Theorem	unsnen 10441	Equinumerosity of a set with a new element added. (Contributed by NM, 7-Nov-2008.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 → (𝐴 ∪ {𝐵}) ≈ suc (card‘𝐴))
Theorem	carddom 10442	Two sets have the dominance relationship iff their cardinalities have the subset relationship. Equation i of [Quine] p. 232. (Contributed by NM, 22-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 30-Apr-2015.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → ((card‘𝐴) ⊆ (card‘𝐵) ↔ 𝐴 ≼ 𝐵))
Theorem	cardsdom 10443	Two sets have the strict dominance relationship iff their cardinalities have the membership relationship. Corollary 19.7(2) of [Eisenberg] p. 310. (Contributed by NM, 22-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 30-Apr-2015.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → ((card‘𝐴) ∈ (card‘𝐵) ↔ 𝐴 ≺ 𝐵))
Theorem	domtri 10444	Trichotomy law for dominance and strict dominance. This theorem is equivalent to the Axiom of Choice. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 30-Apr-2015.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴 ≼ 𝐵 ↔ ¬ 𝐵 ≺ 𝐴))
Theorem	entric 10445	Trichotomy of equinumerosity and strict dominance. This theorem is equivalent to the Axiom of Choice. Theorem 8 of [Suppes] p. 242. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2004.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴 ≺ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐴 ≈ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐵 ≺ 𝐴))
Theorem	entri2 10446	Trichotomy of dominance and strict dominance. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2004.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴 ≼ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐵 ≺ 𝐴))
Theorem	entri3 10447	Trichotomy of dominance. This theorem is equivalent to the Axiom of Choice. Part of Proposition 4.42(d) of [Mendelson] p. 275. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2004.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴 ≼ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴))
Theorem	sdomsdomcard 10448	A set strictly dominates iff its cardinal strictly dominates. (Contributed by NM, 30-Oct-2003.)
⊢ (𝐴 ≺ 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ≺ (card‘𝐵))
Theorem	canth3 10449	Cantor's theorem in terms of cardinals. This theorem tells us that no matter how large a cardinal number is, there is a still larger cardinal number. Theorem 18.12 of [Monk1] p. 133. (Contributed by NM, 5-Nov-2003.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (card‘𝐴) ∈ (card‘𝒫 𝐴))
Theorem	infxpidm 10450	Every infinite class is equinumerous to its Cartesian square. This theorem, which is equivalent to the axiom of choice over ZF, provides the basis for infinite cardinal arithmetic. Proposition 10.40 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 95. This is a corollary of infxpen 9902 (used via infxpidm2 9905). (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Mar-2013.)
⊢ (ω ≼ 𝐴 → (𝐴 × 𝐴) ≈ 𝐴)
Theorem	ondomon 10451*	The class of ordinals dominated by a given set is an ordinal. Theorem 56 of [Suppes] p. 227. This theorem can be proved without the axiom of choice, see hartogs 9430. (Contributed by NM, 7-Nov-2003.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) Use hartogs 9430 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≼ 𝐴} ∈ On)
Theorem	cardmin 10452*	The smallest ordinal that strictly dominates a set is a cardinal. (Contributed by NM, 28-Oct-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 20-Sep-2014.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (card‘∩ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝐴 ≺ 𝑥}) = ∩ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝐴 ≺ 𝑥})
Theorem	ficard 10453	A set is finite iff its cardinal is a natural number. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 2-Sep-2009.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ Fin ↔ (card‘𝐴) ∈ ω))
Theorem	infinf 10454	Equivalence between two infiniteness criteria for sets. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (¬ 𝐴 ∈ Fin ↔ ω ≼ 𝐴))
Theorem	unirnfdomd 10455	The union of the range of a function from an infinite set into the class of finite sets is dominated by its domain. Deduction form. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝑇⟶Fin)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝑇 ∈ Fin)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑉)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∪ ran 𝐹 ≼ 𝑇)
Theorem	konigthlem 10456*	Lemma for konigth 10457. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 22-Feb-2013.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = ∪ 𝑖 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑀‘𝑖)    &   ⊢ 𝑃 = X𝑖 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑁‘𝑖)    &   ⊢ 𝐷 = (𝑖 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ (𝑎 ∈ (𝑀‘𝑖) ↦ ((𝑓‘𝑎)‘𝑖)))    &   ⊢ 𝐸 = (𝑖 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ (𝑒‘𝑖))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑖 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑀‘𝑖) ≺ (𝑁‘𝑖) → 𝑆 ≺ 𝑃)
Theorem	konigth 10457*	Konig's Theorem. If 𝑚(𝑖) ≺ 𝑛(𝑖) for all 𝑖 ∈ 𝐴, then Σ𝑖 ∈ 𝐴𝑚(𝑖) ≺ ∏𝑖 ∈ 𝐴𝑛(𝑖), where the sums and products stand in for disjoint union and infinite cartesian product. The version here is proven with unions rather than disjoint unions for convenience, but the version with disjoint unions is clearly a special case of this version. The Axiom of Choice is needed for this proof, but it contains AC as a simple corollary (letting 𝑚(𝑖) = ∅, this theorem says that an infinite cartesian product of nonempty sets is nonempty), so this is an AC equivalent. Theorem 11.26 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 107. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 22-Feb-2013.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = ∪ 𝑖 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑀‘𝑖)    &   ⊢ 𝑃 = X𝑖 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑁‘𝑖)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑖 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑀‘𝑖) ≺ (𝑁‘𝑖) → 𝑆 ≺ 𝑃)
Theorem	alephsucpw 10458	The power set of an aleph dominates the successor aleph. (The Generalized Continuum Hypothesis says they are equinumerous, see gch3 10564 or gchaleph2 10560.) (Contributed by NM, 27-Aug-2005.)
⊢ (ℵ‘suc 𝐴) ≼ 𝒫 (ℵ‘𝐴)
Theorem	aleph1 10459	The set exponentiation of 2 to the aleph-zero has cardinality of at least aleph-one. (If we were to assume the Continuum Hypothesis, their cardinalities would be the same.) (Contributed by NM, 7-Jul-2004.)
⊢ (ℵ‘1o) ≼ (2o ↑m (ℵ‘∅))
Theorem	alephval2 10460*	An alternate way to express the value of the aleph function for nonzero arguments. Theorem 64 of [Suppes] p. 229. (Contributed by NM, 15-Nov-2003.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ ∅ ∈ 𝐴) → (ℵ‘𝐴) = ∩ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (ℵ‘𝑦) ≺ 𝑥})
Theorem	dominfac 10461	A nonempty set that is a subset of its union is infinite. This version is proved from ax-ac 10347. See dominf 10333 for a version proved from ax-cc 10323. (Contributed by NM, 25-Mar-2007.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ≠ ∅ ∧ 𝐴 ⊆ ∪ 𝐴) → ω ≼ 𝐴)
3.2.4  Cardinal number arithmetic using Axiom of Choice
Theorem	iunctb 10462*	The countable union of countable sets is countable (indexed union version of unictb 10463). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 18-Jan-2014.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ≼ ω ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ≼ ω) → ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ≼ ω)
Theorem	unictb 10463*	The countable union of countable sets is countable. Theorem 6Q of [Enderton] p. 159. See iunctb 10462 for indexed union version. (Contributed by NM, 26-Mar-2006.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ≼ ω ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 ≼ ω) → ∪ 𝐴 ≼ ω)
Theorem	infmap 10464*	An exponentiation law for infinite cardinals. Similar to Lemma 6.2 of [Jech] p. 43. (Contributed by NM, 1-Oct-2004.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 30-Apr-2015.)
⊢ ((ω ≼ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ≼ 𝐴) → (𝐴 ↑m 𝐵) ≈ {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑥 ≈ 𝐵)})
Theorem	alephadd 10465	The sum of two alephs is their maximum. Equation 6.1 of [Jech] p. 42. (Contributed by NM, 29-Sep-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 30-Apr-2015.)
⊢ ((ℵ‘𝐴) ⊔ (ℵ‘𝐵)) ≈ ((ℵ‘𝐴) ∪ (ℵ‘𝐵))
Theorem	alephmul 10466	The product of two alephs is their maximum. Equation 6.1 of [Jech] p. 42. (Contributed by NM, 29-Sep-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 30-Apr-2015.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) → ((ℵ‘𝐴) × (ℵ‘𝐵)) ≈ ((ℵ‘𝐴) ∪ (ℵ‘𝐵)))
Theorem	alephexp1 10467	An exponentiation law for alephs. Lemma 6.1 of [Jech] p. 42. (Contributed by NM, 29-Sep-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 30-Apr-2015.)
⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ∈ On) ∧ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵) → ((ℵ‘𝐴) ↑m (ℵ‘𝐵)) ≈ (2o ↑m (ℵ‘𝐵)))
Theorem	alephsuc3 10468*	An alternate representation of a successor aleph. Compare alephsuc 9956 and alephsuc2 9968. Equality can be obtained by taking the card of the right-hand side then using alephcard 9958 and carden 10439. (Contributed by NM, 23-Oct-2004.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → (ℵ‘suc 𝐴) ≈ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≈ (ℵ‘𝐴)})
Theorem	alephexp2 10469*	An expression equinumerous to 2 to an aleph power. The proof equates the two laws for cardinal exponentiation alephexp1 10467 (which works if the base is less than or equal to the exponent) and infmap 10464 (which works if the exponent is less than or equal to the base). They can be equated only when the base is equal to the exponent, and this is the result. (Contributed by NM, 23-Oct-2004.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ On → (2o ↑m (ℵ‘𝐴)) ≈ {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ⊆ (ℵ‘𝐴) ∧ 𝑥 ≈ (ℵ‘𝐴))})
3.2.5  Cofinality using the Axiom of Choice
Theorem	alephreg 10470	A successor aleph is regular. Theorem 11.15 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 103. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Mar-2013.)
⊢ (cf‘(ℵ‘suc 𝐴)) = (ℵ‘suc 𝐴)
Theorem	pwcfsdom 10471*	A corollary of Konig's Theorem konigth 10457. Theorem 11.28 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 108. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 20-Mar-2013.)
⊢ 𝐻 = (𝑦 ∈ (cf‘(ℵ‘𝐴)) ↦ (har‘(𝑓‘𝑦)))    ⇒   ⊢ (ℵ‘𝐴) ≺ ((ℵ‘𝐴) ↑m (cf‘(ℵ‘𝐴)))
Theorem	cfpwsdom 10472	A corollary of Konig's Theorem konigth 10457. Theorem 11.29 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 108. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 20-Mar-2013.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (2o ≼ 𝐵 → (ℵ‘𝐴) ≺ (cf‘(card‘(𝐵 ↑m (ℵ‘𝐴)))))
Theorem	alephom 10473	From canth2 9043, we know that (ℵ‘0) < (2↑ω), but we cannot prove that (2↑ω) = (ℵ‘1) (this is the Continuum Hypothesis), nor can we prove that it is less than any bound whatsoever (i.e. the statement (ℵ‘𝐴) < (2↑ω) is consistent for any ordinal 𝐴). However, we can prove that (2↑ω) is not equal to (ℵ‘ω), nor (ℵ‘(ℵ‘ω)), on cofinality grounds, because by Konig's Theorem konigth 10457 (in the form of cfpwsdom 10472), (2↑ω) has uncountable cofinality, which eliminates limit alephs like (ℵ‘ω). (The first limit aleph that is not eliminated is (ℵ‘(ℵ‘1)), which has cofinality (ℵ‘1).) (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 21-Mar-2013.)
⊢ (card‘(2o ↑m ω)) ≠ (ℵ‘ω)
Theorem	smobeth 10474	The beth function is strictly monotone. This function is not strictly the beth function, but rather bethA is the same as (card‘(𝑅1‘(ω +o 𝐴))), since conventionally we start counting at the first infinite level, and ignore the finite levels. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Jun-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 2-Jun-2015.)
⊢ Smo (card ∘ 𝑅1)
3.3  ZFC Axioms with no distinct variable requirements
Theorem	nd1 10475	A lemma for proving conditionless ZFC axioms. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 1-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑦 ∈ 𝑧)
Theorem	nd2 10476	A lemma for proving conditionless ZFC axioms. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 1-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)
Theorem	nd3 10477	A lemma for proving conditionless ZFC axioms. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ¬ ∀𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦)
Theorem	nd4 10478	A lemma for proving conditionless ZFC axioms. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ¬ ∀𝑧 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)
Theorem	axextnd 10479	A version of the Axiom of Extensionality with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-2003.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑥((𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 = 𝑧)
Theorem	axrepndlem1 10480*	Lemma for the Axiom of Replacement with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑))))
Theorem	axrepndlem2 10481	Lemma for the Axiom of Replacement with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧) ∧ ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧) → ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑))))
Theorem	axrepnd 10482	A version of the Axiom of Replacement with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(∀𝑦 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(∀𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑)))
Theorem	axunndlem1 10483*	Lemma for the Axiom of Union with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∃𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)
Theorem	axunnd 10484	A version of the Axiom of Union with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∃𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)
Theorem	axpowndlem1 10485	Lemma for the Axiom of Power Sets with no distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2002.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∀𝑥(∃𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)))
Theorem	axpowndlem2 10486*	Lemma for the Axiom of Power Sets with no distinct variable conditions. Revised to remove a redundant antecedent from the consequence. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2016.) (Revised and shortened by Wolf Lammen, 9-Jun-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∀𝑥(∃𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)))
Theorem	axpowndlem3 10487*	Lemma for the Axiom of Power Sets with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2002.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 10-Dec-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Jun-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∀𝑥(∃𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥))
Theorem	axpowndlem4 10488	Lemma for the Axiom of Power Sets with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 10-Dec-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∀𝑥(∃𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥))))
Theorem	axpownd 10489	A version of the Axiom of Power Sets with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∀𝑥(∃𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥))
Theorem	axregndlem1 10490	Lemma for the Axiom of Regularity with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))))
Theorem	axregndlem2 10491*	Lemma for the Axiom of Regularity with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 10-Dec-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)))
Theorem	axregnd 10492	A version of the Axiom of Regularity with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)))
Theorem	axinfndlem1 10493*	Lemma for the Axiom of Infinity with no distinct variable conditions. (New usage is discouraged.) (Contributed by NM, 5-Jan-2002.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 → ∃𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → ∃𝑧(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥))))
Theorem	axinfnd 10494	A version of the Axiom of Infinity with no distinct variable conditions. (New usage is discouraged.) (Contributed by NM, 5-Jan-2002.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 → (𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → ∃𝑧(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥))))
Theorem	axacndlem1 10495	Lemma for the Axiom of Choice with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(∀𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) → ∃𝑤∀𝑦(∃𝑤((𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥)) ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑤)))
Theorem	axacndlem2 10496	Lemma for the Axiom of Choice with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(∀𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) → ∃𝑤∀𝑦(∃𝑤((𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥)) ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑤)))
Theorem	axacndlem3 10497	Lemma for the Axiom of Choice with no distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2002.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(∀𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) → ∃𝑤∀𝑦(∃𝑤((𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥)) ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑤)))
Theorem	axacndlem4 10498*	Lemma for the Axiom of Choice with no distinct variable conditions. (New usage is discouraged.) (Contributed by NM, 8-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 10-Dec-2016.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(∀𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) → ∃𝑤∀𝑦(∃𝑤((𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥)) ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑤))
Theorem	axacndlem5 10499*	Lemma for the Axiom of Choice with no distinct variable conditions. (New usage is discouraged.) (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 10-Dec-2016.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(∀𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) → ∃𝑤∀𝑦(∃𝑤((𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥)) ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑤))
Theorem	axacnd 10500	A version of the Axiom of Choice with no distinct variable conditions. (New usage is discouraged.) (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 10-Dec-2016.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(∀𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) → ∃𝑤∀𝑦(∃𝑤((𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤) ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥)) ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑤))