| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 11 of 506) | < 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: | (1-31248) |
(31249-32771) |
(32772-50582) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | pm4.53 1001 | Theorem *4.53 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.54 1002 | 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 1003 | Theorem *4.55 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.56 1004 | Theorem *4.56 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | oran 1005 | Disjunction in terms of conjunction (De Morgan's law). Compare Theorem *4.57 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.57 1006 | Theorem *4.57 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm3.1 1007 | Theorem *3.1 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 111. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ¬ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm3.11 1008 | Theorem *3.11 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 111. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm3.12 1009 | Theorem *3.12 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 111. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm3.13 1010 | Theorem *3.13 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 111. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm3.14 1011 | Theorem *3.14 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 111. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.44 1012 | Theorem *4.44 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 119. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.45 1013 | Theorem *4.45 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 119. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ∧ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | orabs 1014 | Absorption of redundant internal disjunct. Compare Theorem *4.45 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 119. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 28-Feb-2014.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | oranabs 1015 | Absorb a disjunct into a conjunct. (Contributed by Roy F. Longton, 23-Jun-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Nov-2013.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.61 1016 | Theorem *5.61 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2013.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.6 1017 | Conjunction in antecedent versus disjunction in consequent. Theorem *5.6 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | orcanai 1018 | Change disjunction in consequent to conjunction in antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jun-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | orsild 1019 | A lemma for not-or-not elimination, in deduction form. (Contributed by Giovanni Mascellani, 15-Sep-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | orsird 1020 | A lemma for not-or-not elimination, in deduction form. (Contributed by Giovanni Mascellani, 15-Sep-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.79 1021 | 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 1022 | 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 1023 | 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 1024 | Distributive law for disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | andi 1025 | 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 1026 | Distributive law for conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | orddi 1027 | 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 1028 | 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 1029 | 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 1030 | 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 1031 | 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 1032 | Two ways to express exclusive disjunction (df-xor 1542). 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 1033 | 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 1034 | 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 1556 does hold in it. (Contributed by NM, 3-Oct-2008.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ ¬ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.54 1035 | 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 1036 | Theorem *5.62 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by Roy F. Longton, 21-Jun-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.63 1037 | 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 1038 | Miscellaneous inference relating falsehoods. (Contributed by NM, 31-Mar-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | ninba 1039 | Miscellaneous inference relating falsehoods. (Contributed by NM, 31-Mar-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → (¬ 𝜑 ↔ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.43 1040 | 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 1041 | Theorem *4.82 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)) ↔ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.83 1042 | Theorem *4.83 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓)) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | pclem6 1043 | 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 1044 | Dijkstra-Scholten's Golden Rule for calculational proofs. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜑) ↔ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.71 1045 | 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 1046 | 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 1047 | 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 | ecase3 1048 | 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 1049 | Inference for elimination by cases. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jul-2005.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒) & ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜒 | ||
| Theorem | ecase3d 1050 | 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 1051 | 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 1052 | 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 | ccase 1053 | 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 1054 | 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 1055 | Inference for combining cases. (Contributed by NM, 29-Jul-1999.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜏) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜏) & ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃)) → 𝜏) | ||
| Theorem | 4cases 1056 | 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 1057 | 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 1058 | 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 1059 | 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 1060 | Lemma for an alternate version of weak deduction theorem. (Contributed by NM, 2-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ ((𝜓 → 𝜑) → (𝜒 ∧ 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | dedlema 1061 | Lemma for weak deduction theorem. See also ifptru 1091. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jun-2002.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) ∨ (𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | dedlemb 1062 | Lemma for weak deduction theorem. See also ifpfal 1092. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1999.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) ∨ (𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | cases2 1063 | 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 1064 | Alternate proof of cases2 1063, not using dedlema 1061 or dedlemb 1062. (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 1065 | 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 1066 | Theorem *5.24 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | 4exmid 1067 | The disjunction of the four possible combinations of two wffs and their negations is always true. A four-way excluded middle (see exmid 907). (Contributed by David Abernethy, 28-Jan-2014.) (Proof shortened by NM, 29-Oct-2021.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)) ∨ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | consensus 1068 | 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 1069 | Theorem *4.42 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 119. See also ifpid 1093. (Contributed by Roy F. Longton, 21-Jun-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | prlem1 1070 | 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 1071 | 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 1072 | 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 1073 | 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 1074 | A closed form of mpbir 234, analogous to pm2.27 43 (assertion). (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Roger Witte, 17-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑)) → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | jaoi2 1075 | 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 1076 | 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 1077 | 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 1079). It is the analogue for propositions of the conditional operator for classes, denoted by if(𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) (see df-if 4489). | ||
| Syntax | wif 1078 | Extend wff notation to include the conditional operator for propositions. |
| wff if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) | ||
| Definition | df-ifp 1079 |
Definition of the conditional operator for propositions. The expression
if-(𝜑,
𝜓, 𝜒) is read "if 𝜑 then
𝜓
else 𝜒".
See dfifp2 1080, dfifp3 1081, dfifp4 1082, dfifp5 1083, dfifp6 1084 and dfifp7 1085 for
alternate definitions.
This definition (in the form of dfifp2 1080) 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 1080 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 1080 | 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 1079). (Contributed by BJ, 22-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | dfifp3 1081 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) |
| ⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | dfifp4 1082 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) |
| ⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | dfifp5 1083 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | dfifp6 1084 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ ¬ (𝜒 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | dfifp7 1085 | Alternate definition of the conditional operator for propositions. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜒 → 𝜑) → (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | ifpdfbi 1086 | Define the biconditional as conditional logic operator. (Contributed by RP, 20-Apr-2020.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof shortened by Garrett Katz, 25-Jun-2026.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ if-(𝜑, 𝜓, ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | ifpdfbiOLD 1087 | Obsolete version of ifpdfbi 1086 as of 25-Jun-2026. Define the biconditional as conditional logic operator. (Contributed by RP, 20-Apr-2020.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ if-(𝜑, 𝜓, ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | anifp 1088 | The conditional operator is implied by the conjunction of its possible outputs. Dual statement of ifpor 1089. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | ifpor 1089 | The conditional operator implies the disjunction of its possible outputs. Dual statement of anifp 1088. (Contributed by BJ, 1-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | ifpn 1090 | 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 | ifptru 1091 | Value of the conditional operator for propositions when its first argument is true. Analogue for propositions of iftrue 4494. This is essentially dedlema 1061. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Sep-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Jul-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | ifpfal 1092 | Value of the conditional operator for propositions when its first argument is false. Analogue for propositions of iffalse 4497. This is essentially dedlemb 1062. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Sep-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | ifpid 1093 | Value of the conditional operator for propositions when the same proposition is returned in either case. Analogue for propositions of ifid 4529. This is essentially pm4.42 1069. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Sep-2019.) |
| ⊢ (if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜓) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | casesifp 1094 | Version of cases 1058 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 1091 and ifpfal 1092. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Sep-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ if-(𝜑, 𝜒, 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | ifpbi123d 1095 | 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 | ifpbi23d 1096 | 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 1097 | 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 1098 | 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 4547. For more information on the weak deduction theorem, see the Weak Deduction Theorem page mmdeduction.html 4547. | ||
| Theorem | elimh 1099 | 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 1100 | 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) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |