![]() |
Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 11 of 479) | < 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: | ![]() (1-30158) |
![]() (30159-31681) |
![]() (31682-47805) |
Type | Label | Description |
---|---|---|
Statement | ||
Theorem | orcanai 1001 | Change disjunction in consequent to conjunction in antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jun-1994.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | pm4.79 1002 | Theorem *4.79 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 121. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2013.) |
⊢ (((𝜓 → 𝜑) ∨ (𝜒 → 𝜑)) ↔ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.53 1003 | Theorem *5.53 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ ((((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜃) ↔ (((𝜑 → 𝜃) ∧ (𝜓 → 𝜃)) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | ordi 1004 | Distributive law for disjunction. Theorem *4.41 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 119. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 28-Nov-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | ordir 1005 | Distributive law for disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | andi 1006 | Distributive law for conjunction. Theorem *4.4 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 118. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jan-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | andir 1007 | Distributive law for conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | orddi 1008 | Double distributive law for disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) ↔ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜃)) ∧ ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃)))) | ||
Theorem | anddi 1009 | Double distributive law for conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃)) ↔ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜃)) ∨ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃)))) | ||
Theorem | pm5.17 1010 | Theorem *5.17 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Jan-2013.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.15 1011 | Theorem *5.15 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 15-Oct-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.16 1012 | Theorem *5.16 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 17-Oct-2013.) |
⊢ ¬ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | xor 1013 | Two ways to express exclusive disjunction (df-xor 1510). Theorem *5.22 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 22-Jan-2013.) |
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | nbi2 1014 | Two ways to express "exclusive or". (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Jan-2013.) |
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | xordi 1015 | Conjunction distributes over exclusive-or, using ¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) to express exclusive-or. This is one way to interpret the distributive law of multiplication over addition in modulo 2 arithmetic. This is not necessarily true in intuitionistic logic, though anxordi 1526 does hold in it. (Contributed by NM, 3-Oct-2008.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ ¬ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | pm5.54 1016 | Theorem *5.54 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 7-Nov-2013.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜑) ∨ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.62 1017 | Theorem *5.62 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by Roy F. Longton, 21-Jun-2005.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | pm5.63 1018 | Theorem *5.63 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Dec-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | niabn 1019 | Miscellaneous inference relating falsehoods. (Contributed by NM, 31-Mar-1994.) |
⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | ninba 1020 | Miscellaneous inference relating falsehoods. (Contributed by NM, 31-Mar-1994.) |
⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → (¬ 𝜑 ↔ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | pm4.43 1021 | Theorem *4.43 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 119. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 26-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | pm4.82 1022 | Theorem *4.82 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)) ↔ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | pm4.83 1023 | Theorem *4.83 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓)) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pclem6 1024 | Negation inferred from embedded conjunct. (Contributed by NM, 20-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)) → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | bigolden 1025 | Dijkstra-Scholten's Golden Rule for calculational proofs. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜑) ↔ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | pm5.71 1026 | Theorem *5.71 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by Roy F. Longton, 23-Jun-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝜓 → ¬ 𝜒) → (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | pm5.75 1027 | Theorem *5.75 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 126. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Dec-2012.) (Proof shortened by Kyle Wyonch, 12-Feb-2021.) |
⊢ (((𝜒 → ¬ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) → ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | ecase2d 1028 | Deduction for elimination by cases. (Contributed by NM, 21-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ∨ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) | ||
Theorem | ecase2dOLD 1029 | Obsolete version of ecase2d 1028 as of 19-Sep-2024. (Contributed by NM, 21-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 22-Dec-2012.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ∨ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏) | ||
Theorem | ecase3 1030 | Inference for elimination by cases. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 26-Nov-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜒 | ||
Theorem | ecase 1031 | Inference for elimination by cases. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jul-2005.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜒 | ||
Theorem | ecase3d 1032 | Deduction for elimination by cases. (Contributed by NM, 2-May-1996.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | ecased 1033 | Deduction for elimination by cases. (Contributed by NM, 8-Oct-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜒 → 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | ecase3ad 1034 | Deduction for elimination by cases. (Contributed by NM, 24-May-2013.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | ecase3adOLD 1035 | Obsolete version of ecase3ad 1034 as of 20-Sep-2024. (Contributed by NM, 24-May-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) → 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | ccase 1036 | Inference for combining cases. (Contributed by NM, 29-Jul-1999.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 6-Jan-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) & ⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) | ||
Theorem | ccased 1037 | Deduction for combining cases. (Contributed by NM, 9-May-2004.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜂)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜃 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜂)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜃 ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃) ∧ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜏)) → 𝜂)) | ||
Theorem | ccase2 1038 | Inference for combining cases. (Contributed by NM, 29-Jul-1999.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜏) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜏) & ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) | ||
Theorem | 4cases 1039 | Inference eliminating two antecedents from the four possible cases that result from their true/false combinations. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2003.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜒 | ||
Theorem | 4casesdan 1040 | Deduction eliminating two antecedents from the four possible cases that result from their true/false combinations. (Contributed by NM, 19-Mar-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)) → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (¬ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) → 𝜃) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | cases 1041 | Case disjunction according to the value of 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 25-Apr-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | dedlem0a 1042 | Lemma for an alternate version of weak deduction theorem. (Contributed by NM, 2-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ ((𝜒 → 𝜑) → (𝜓 ∧ 𝜑)))) | ||
Theorem | dedlem0b 1043 | Lemma for an alternate version of weak deduction theorem. (Contributed by NM, 2-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ ((𝜓 → 𝜑) → (𝜒 ∧ 𝜑)))) | ||
Theorem | dedlema 1044 | Lemma for weak deduction theorem. See also ifptru 1074. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jun-2002.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) ∨ (𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)))) | ||
Theorem | dedlemb 1045 | Lemma for weak deduction theorem. See also ifpfal 1075. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1999.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) ∨ (𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)))) | ||
Theorem | cases2 1046 | Case disjunction according to the value of 𝜑. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Apr-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 28-Feb-2022.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | cases2ALT 1047 | Alternate proof of cases2 1046, not using dedlema 1044 or dedlemb 1045. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Apr-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | dfbi3 1048 | An alternate definition of the biconditional. Theorem *5.23 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 27-Jun-2002.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Nov-2013.) (Proof shortened by NM, 29-Oct-2021.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | pm5.24 1049 | Theorem *5.24 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
⊢ (¬ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | 4exmid 1050 | The disjunction of the four possible combinations of two wffs and their negations is always true. A four-way excluded middle (see exmid 893). (Contributed by David Abernethy, 28-Jan-2014.) (Proof shortened by NM, 29-Oct-2021.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)) ∨ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | consensus 1051 | The consensus theorem. This theorem and its dual (with ∨ and ∧ interchanged) are commonly used in computer logic design to eliminate redundant terms from Boolean expressions. Specifically, we prove that the term (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) on the left-hand side is redundant. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-2003.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Jan-2013.) |
⊢ ((((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | pm4.42 1052 | Theorem *4.42 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 119. See also ifpid 1076. (Contributed by Roy F. Longton, 21-Jun-2005.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | prlem1 1053 | A specialized lemma for set theory (to derive the Axiom of Pairing). (Contributed by NM, 18-Oct-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jan-2013.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜂 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜓 → ¬ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) → 𝜂))) | ||
Theorem | prlem2 1054 | A specialized lemma for set theory (to derive the Axiom of Pairing). (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 9-Dec-2012.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∧ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)))) | ||
Theorem | oplem1 1055 | A specialized lemma for set theory (ordered pair theorem). (Contributed by NM, 18-Oct-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 8-Dec-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ∨ 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | dn1 1056 | A single axiom for Boolean algebra known as DN1. See McCune, Veroff, Fitelson, Harris, Feist, Wos, Short single axioms for Boolean algebra, Journal of Automated Reasoning, 29(1):1--16, 2002. (https://www.cs.unm.edu/~mccune/papers/basax/v12.pdf). (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 3-Jul-2009.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 6-Jan-2013.) |
⊢ (¬ (¬ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) ∨ ¬ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ (¬ 𝜒 ∨ ¬ (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃)))) ↔ 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | bianir 1057 | A closed form of mpbir 230, analogous to pm2.27 42 (assertion). (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Roger Witte, 17-Aug-2020.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑)) → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | jaoi2 1058 | Inference removing a negated conjunct in a disjunction of an antecedent if this conjunct is part of the disjunction. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 3-Nov-2017.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Sep-2018.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | jaoi3 1059 | Inference separating a disjunct of an antecedent. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 25-May-2018.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ornld 1060 | Selecting one statement from a disjunction if one of the disjuncted statements is false. (Contributed by AV, 6-Sep-2018.) (Proof shortened by AV, 13-Oct-2018.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Jan-2020.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝜑 → (𝜃 ∨ 𝜏)) ∧ ¬ 𝜃) → 𝜏)) | ||
This subsection introduces the conditional operator for propositions, denoted by if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) (see df-ifp 1062). It is the analogue for propositions of the conditional operator for classes, denoted by if(𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) (see df-if 4528). | ||
Syntax | wif 1061 | Extend wff notation to include the conditional operator for propositions. |
wff if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) | ||
Definition | df-ifp 1062 |
Definition of the conditional operator for propositions. The expression
if-(𝜑,
𝜓, 𝜒) is read "if 𝜑 then
𝜓
else 𝜒".
See dfifp2 1063, dfifp3 1064, dfifp4 1065, dfifp5 1066, dfifp6 1067 and dfifp7 1068 for
alternate definitions.
This definition (in the form of dfifp2 1063) appears in Section II.24 of [Church] p. 129 (Definition D12 page 132), where it is called "conditioned disjunction". Church's [𝜓, 𝜑, 𝜒] corresponds to our if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) (note the permutation of the first two variables). This form was chosen as the definition rather than dfifp2 1063 for compatibility with intuitionistic logic development: with this form, it is clear that if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) implies decidability of 𝜑, which is most often what is wanted. Church uses the conditional operator as an intermediate step to prove completeness of some systems of connectives. The first result is that the system {if-, ⊤, ⊥} is complete: for the induction step, consider a formula of n+1 variables; single out one variable, say 𝜑; when one sets 𝜑 to True (resp. False), then what remains is a formula of n variables, so by the induction hypothesis it is equivalent to a formula using only the connectives if-, ⊤, ⊥, say 𝜓 (resp. 𝜒); therefore, the formula if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) is equivalent to the initial formula of n+1 variables. Now, since { → , ¬ } and similar systems suffice to express the connectives if-, ⊤, ⊥, they are also complete. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Jun-2019.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | dfifp2 1063 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. The value of if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) is "if 𝜑 then 𝜓, and if not 𝜑 then 𝜒". This is the definition used in Section II.24 of [Church] p. 129 (Definition D12 page 132) (see comment of df-ifp 1062). (Contributed by BJ, 22-Jun-2019.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | dfifp3 1064 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | dfifp4 1065 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | dfifp5 1066 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Oct-2019.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | dfifp6 1067 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Oct-2019.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ ¬ (𝜒 → 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | dfifp7 1068 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Oct-2019.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜒 → 𝜑) → (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
Theorem | ifpdfbi 1069 | Define the biconditional as conditional logic operator. (Contributed by RP, 20-Apr-2020.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 30-Apr-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ if-(𝜑, 𝜓, ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | anifp 1070 | The conditional operator is implied by the conjunction of its possible outputs. Dual statement of ifpor 1071. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | ifpor 1071 | The conditional operator implies the disjunction of its possible outputs. Dual statement of anifp 1070. (Contributed by BJ, 1-Oct-2019.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | ifpn 1072 | Conditional operator for the negation of a proposition. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-May-2024.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ if-(¬ 𝜑, 𝜒, 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | ifpnOLD 1073 | Obsolete version of ifpn 1072 as of 5-May-2024. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ if-(¬ 𝜑, 𝜒, 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | ifptru 1074 | Value of the conditional operator for propositions when its first argument is true. Analogue for propositions of iftrue 4533. This is essentially dedlema 1044. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Sep-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Jul-2020.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | ifpfal 1075 | Value of the conditional operator for propositions when its first argument is false. Analogue for propositions of iffalse 4536. This is essentially dedlemb 1045. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Sep-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jun-2020.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | ifpid 1076 | Value of the conditional operator for propositions when the same proposition is returned in either case. Analogue for propositions of ifid 4567. This is essentially pm4.42 1052. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜓) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | casesifp 1077 | Version of cases 1041 expressed using if-. Case disjunction according to the value of 𝜑. One can see this as a proof that the two hypotheses characterize the conditional operator for propositions. For the converses, see ifptru 1074 and ifpfal 1075. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ if-(𝜑, 𝜒, 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | ifpbi123d 1078 | Equivalence deduction for conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by AV, 30-Dec-2020.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜂)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (if-(𝜓, 𝜒, 𝜃) ↔ if-(𝜏, 𝜂, 𝜁))) | ||
Theorem | ifpbi123dOLD 1079 | Obsolete version of ifpbi123d 1078 as of 17-Apr-2024. (Contributed by AV, 30-Dec-2020.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜂)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (if-(𝜓, 𝜒, 𝜃) ↔ if-(𝜏, 𝜂, 𝜁))) | ||
Theorem | ifpbi23d 1080 | Equivalence deduction for conditional operator for propositions. Convenience theorem for a frequent case. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Apr-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜂)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (if-(𝜓, 𝜒, 𝜃) ↔ if-(𝜓, 𝜂, 𝜁))) | ||
Theorem | ifpimpda 1081 | Separation of the values of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by AV, 30-Dec-2020.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Feb-2021.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → if-(𝜓, 𝜒, 𝜃)) | ||
Theorem | 1fpid3 1082 | The value of the conditional operator for propositions is its third argument if the first and second argument imply the third argument. (Contributed by AV, 4-Apr-2021.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) → 𝜒) | ||
This subsection contains a few results related to the weak deduction theorem in propositional calculus. For the weak deduction theorem in set theory, see the section beginning with dedth 4585. For more information on the weak deduction theorem, see the Weak Deduction Theorem page mmdeduction.html 4585. | ||
Theorem | elimh 1083 | Hypothesis builder for the weak deduction theorem. For more information, see the Weak Deduction Theorem page mmdeduction.html. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jun-2002.) Revised to use the conditional operator. (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) Commute consequent. (Revised by Steven Nguyen, 27-Apr-2023.) |
⊢ ((if-(𝜒, 𝜑, 𝜓) ↔ 𝜑) → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ ((if-(𝜒, 𝜑, 𝜓) ↔ 𝜓) → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ 𝜃 ⇒ ⊢ 𝜏 | ||
Theorem | dedt 1084 | The weak deduction theorem. For more information, see the Weak Deduction Theorem page mmdeduction.html. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jun-2002.) Revised to use the conditional operator. (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) Commute consequent. (Revised by Steven Nguyen, 27-Apr-2023.) |
⊢ ((if-(𝜒, 𝜑, 𝜓) ↔ 𝜑) → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ 𝜏 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) | ||
Theorem | con3ALT 1085 | Proof of con3 153 from its associated inference con3i 154 that illustrates the use of the weak deduction theorem dedt 1084. (Contributed by NM, 27-Jun-2002.) Revised to use the conditional operator. (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) Revised dedt 1084 and elimh 1083. (Revised by Steven Nguyen, 27-Apr-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (¬ 𝜓 → ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
Syntax | w3o 1086 | Extend wff definition to include three-way disjunction ('or'). |
wff (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) | ||
Syntax | w3a 1087 | Extend wff definition to include three-way conjunction ('and'). |
wff (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) | ||
Definition | df-3or 1088 | Define disjunction ('or') of three wff's. Definition *2.33 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 105. This abbreviation reduces the number of parentheses and emphasizes that the order of bracketing is not important by virtue of the associative law orass 920. (Contributed by NM, 8-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
Definition | df-3an 1089 | Define conjunction ('and') of three wff's. Definition *4.34 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 118. This abbreviation reduces the number of parentheses and emphasizes that the order of bracketing is not important by virtue of the associative law anass 469. (Contributed by NM, 8-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | 3orass 1090 | Associative law for triple disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 8-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | 3orel1 1091 | Partial elimination of a triple disjunction by denial of a disjunct. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 26-Mar-2011.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | 3orrot 1092 | Rotation law for triple disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 4-Apr-1995.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | 3orcoma 1093 | Commutation law for triple disjunction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | 3orcomb 1094 | Commutation law for triple disjunction. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 20-Apr-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 8-Apr-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | 3anass 1095 | Associative law for triple conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 8-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | 3anan12 1096 | Convert triple conjunction to conjunction, then commute. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 14-Jun-2011.) (Revised to shorten 3ancoma 1098 by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jun-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∧ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | 3anan32 1097 | Convert triple conjunction to conjunction, then commute. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | 3ancoma 1098 | Commutation law for triple conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 21-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jun-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | 3ancomb 1099 | Commutation law for triple conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 21-Apr-1994.) (Revised to shorten 3anrot 1100 by Wolf Lammen, 9-Jun-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | 3anrot 1100 | Rotation law for triple conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 8-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 9-Jun-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜑)) |
< Previous Next > |
Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |