| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 16 of 504) | < Previous Next > | |
| Bad symbols? Try the
GIF version. |
||
|
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > MPE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
||
| Color key: | (1-31009) |
(31010-32532) |
(32533-50307) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | nanan 1501 | Conjunction in terms of alternative denial. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | dfnan2 1502 | Alternative denial in terms of our primitive connectives (implication and negation). (Contributed by WL, 26-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | nanor 1503 | Alternative denial in terms of disjunction and negation. This explains the name "alternative denial". (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2022.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | nancom 1504 | Alternative denial is commutative. Remark: alternative denial is not associative, see nanass 1518. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-May-2015.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nannan 1505 | Nested alternative denials. (Contributed by Jeff Hoffman, 19-Nov-2007.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊼ (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | nanim 1506 | Implication in terms of alternative denial. (Contributed by Jeff Hoffman, 19-Nov-2007.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ⊼ (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | nannot 1507 | Negation in terms of alternative denial. (Contributed by Jeff Hoffman, 19-Nov-2007.) Use dfnan2 1502. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ⊼ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi 1508 | Biconditional in terms of alternative denial. (Contributed by Jeff Hoffman, 19-Nov-2007.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓) ⊼ ((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜑) ⊼ (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜓)))) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi1 1509 | Introduce a right anti-conjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 1-Sep-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi2 1510 | Introduce a left anti-conjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 1-Sep-2011.) (Proof shortened by SF, 2-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ((𝜒 ⊼ 𝜑) ↔ (𝜒 ⊼ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi12 1511 | Join two logical equivalences with anti-conjunction. (Contributed by SF, 2-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) → ((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi1i 1512 | Introduce a right anti-conjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by SF, 2-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi2i 1513 | Introduce a left anti-conjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by SF, 2-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜒 ⊼ 𝜑) ↔ (𝜒 ⊼ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi12i 1514 | Join two logical equivalences with anti-conjunction. (Contributed by SF, 2-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi1d 1515 | Introduce a right anti-conjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by SF, 2-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ⊼ 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 ⊼ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi2d 1516 | Introduce a left anti-conjunct to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by SF, 2-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜃 ⊼ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜃 ⊼ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | nanbi12d 1517 | Join two logical equivalences with anti-conjunction. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 2-Jan-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ⊼ 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 ⊼ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | nanass 1518 | A characterization of when an expression involving alternative denials associates. Remark: alternative denial is commutative, see nancom 1504. (Contributed by Richard Penner, 29-Feb-2020.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Oct-2022.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ↔ (((𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓) ⊼ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ⊼ (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒)))) | ||
| Syntax | wxo 1519 | Extend wff definition to include exclusive disjunction ("xor"). |
| wff (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) | ||
| Definition | df-xor 1520 | Define exclusive disjunction (logical "xor"). Return true if either the left or right, but not both, are true. After we define the constant true ⊤ (df-tru 1551) and the constant false ⊥ (df-fal 1561), we will be able to prove these truth table values: ((⊤ ⊻ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) (truxortru 1593), ((⊤ ⊻ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) (truxorfal 1594), ((⊥ ⊻ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) (falxortru 1595), and ((⊥ ⊻ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) (falxorfal 1596). Contrast with ∧ (df-an 398), ∨ (df-or 855), → (wi 4), and ⊼ (df-nan 1500). (Contributed by FL, 22-Nov-2010.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | xnor 1521 | Two ways to write XNOR (exclusive not-or). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | xorcom 1522 | The connector ⊻ is commutative. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Apr-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 ⊻ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | xorass 1523 | The connector ⊻ is associative. (Contributed by FL, 22-Nov-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) ⊻ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ⊻ (𝜓 ⊻ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | excxor 1524 | This tautology shows that xor is really exclusive. (Contributed by FL, 22-Nov-2010.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | xor2 1525 | Two ways to express "exclusive or". (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | xoror 1526 | Exclusive disjunction implies disjunction ("XOR implies OR"). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Apr-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | xornan 1527 | Exclusive disjunction implies alternative denial ("XOR implies NAND"). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Apr-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) → ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | xornan2 1528 | XOR implies NAND (written with the ⊼ connector). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Apr-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | xorneg2 1529 | The connector ⊻ is negated under negation of one argument. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊻ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | xorneg1 1530 | The connector ⊻ is negated under negation of one argument. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | xorneg 1531 | The connector ⊻ is unchanged under negation of both arguments. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ⊻ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | xorbi12i 1532 | Equality property for exclusive disjunction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Apr-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊻ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ⊻ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | xorbi12d 1533 | Equality property for exclusive disjunction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Sep-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ⊻ 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 ⊻ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | anxordi 1534 | Conjunction distributes over exclusive-or. In intuitionistic logic this assertion is also true, even though xordi 1025 does not necessarily hold, in part because the usual definition of xor is subtly different in intuitionistic logic. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 7-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ⊻ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ⊻ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | xorexmid 1535 | Exclusive-or variant of the law of the excluded middle (exmid 901). This statement is ancient, going back to at least Stoic logic. This statement does not necessarily hold in intuitionistic logic. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 23-Feb-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Syntax | wnor 1536 | Extend wff definition to include joint denial ("nor"). |
| wff (𝜑 ⊽ 𝜓) | ||
| Definition | df-nor 1537 | Define joint denial ("not-or" or "nor"). After we define the constant true ⊤ (df-tru 1551) and the constant false ⊥ (df-fal 1561), we will be able to prove these truth table values: ((⊤ ⊽ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) (trunortru 1597), ((⊤ ⊽ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) (trunorfal 1598), ((⊥ ⊽ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) (falnortru 1599), and ((⊥ ⊽ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) (falnorfal 1600). Contrast with ∧ (df-an 398), ∨ (df-or 855), → (wi 4), ⊼ (df-nan 1500), and ⊻ (df-xor 1520). (Contributed by Remi, 25-Oct-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊽ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | norcom 1538 | The connector ⊽ is commutative. (Contributed by Remi, 25-Oct-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Apr-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ⊽ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nornot 1539 | ¬ is expressible via ⊽. (Contributed by Remi, 25-Oct-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 8-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ⊽ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | noran 1540 | ∧ is expressible via ⊽. (Contributed by Remi, 26-Oct-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 8-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ⊽ 𝜑) ⊽ (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | noror 1541 | ∨ is expressible via ⊽. (Contributed by Remi, 26-Oct-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 8-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ⊽ 𝜓) ⊽ (𝜑 ⊽ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | norasslem1 1542 | This lemma shows the equivalence of two expressions, used in norass 1545. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ⊽ 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | norasslem2 1543 | This lemma specializes biimt 362 suitably for the proof of norass 1545. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | norasslem3 1544 | This lemma specializes biorf 943 suitably for the proof of norass 1545. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → ((𝜓 → 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | norass 1545 | A characterization of when an expression involving joint denials associates. This is identical to the case when alternative denial is associative, see nanass 1518. Remark: Like alternative denial, joint denial is also commutative, see norcom 1538. (Contributed by RP, 29-Oct-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ↔ (((𝜑 ⊽ 𝜓) ⊽ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ⊽ (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒)))) | ||
Even though it is not ordinarily part of propositional calculus, the universal quantifier ∀ is introduced here so that the soundness of Definition df-tru 1551 can be checked by the same algorithm that is used for predicate calculus. Its first real use is in Definition df-ex 1788 in the predicate calculus section below. For those who want propositional calculus to be self-contained, i.e., to use wff variables only, the alternate Definition dftru2 1553 may be adopted and this subsection moved down to the start of the subsection with wex 1787 below. However, the use of dftru2 1553 as a definition requires a more elaborate definition checking algorithm that we prefer to avoid. | ||
| Syntax | wal 1546 | Extend wff definition to include the universal quantifier ("for all"). ∀𝑥𝜑 is read "𝜑 (phi) is true for all 𝑥". Typically, in its final application 𝜑 would be replaced with a wff containing a (free) occurrence of the variable 𝑥, for example 𝑥 = 𝑦. In a universe with a finite number of objects, "for all" is equivalent to a big conjunction (AND) with one wff for each possible case of 𝑥. When the universe is infinite (as with set theory), such a propositional-calculus equivalent is not possible because an infinitely long formula has no meaning, but conceptually the idea is the same. |
| wff ∀𝑥𝜑 | ||
Even though it is not ordinarily part of propositional calculus, the equality predicate = is introduced here so that the soundness of definition df-tru 1551 can be checked by the same algorithm as is used for predicate calculus. Its first real use is in Theorem weq 1970 in the predicate calculus section below. For those who want propositional calculus to be self-contained, i.e., to use wff variables only, the alternate definition dftru2 1553 may be adopted and this subsection moved down to just above weq 1970 below. However, the use of dftru2 1553 as a definition requires a more elaborate definition checking algorithm that we prefer to avoid. | ||
| Syntax | cv 1547 |
This syntax construction states that a variable 𝑥, which has been
declared to be a setvar variable by $f statement vx, is also a class
expression. This can be justified informally as follows. We know that
the class builder {𝑦 ∣ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥} is a class by cab 2719.
Since (when
𝑦 is distinct from 𝑥) we
have 𝑥 =
{𝑦 ∣ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥} by
cvjust 2735, we can argue that the syntax "class 𝑥 " can be viewed as
an abbreviation for "class {𝑦 ∣ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥}". See the discussion
under the definition of class in [Jech] p.
4 showing that "Every set can
be considered to be a class".
While it is tempting and perhaps occasionally useful to view cv 1547 as a "type conversion" from a setvar variable to a class variable, keep in mind that cv 1547 is intrinsically no different from any other class-building syntax such as cab 2719, cun 3882, or c0 4263. For a general discussion of the theory of classes and the role of cv 1547, see mmset.html#class 1547. (The description above applies to set theory, not predicate calculus. The purpose of introducing class 𝑥 here, and not in set theory where it belongs, is to allow to express, i.e., "prove", the weq 1970 of predicate calculus from the wceq 1548 of set theory, so that we do not overload the = connective with two syntax definitions. This is done to prevent ambiguity that would complicate some Metamath parsers.) |
| class 𝑥 | ||
| Syntax | wceq 1548 |
Extend wff definition to include class equality.
For a general discussion of the theory of classes, see mmset.html#class. (The purpose of introducing wff 𝐴 = 𝐵 here, and not in set theory where it belongs, is to allow to express, i.e., "prove", the weq 1970 of predicate calculus in terms of the wceq 1548 of set theory, so that we do not "overload" the = connective with two syntax definitions. This is done to prevent ambiguity that would complicate some Metamath parsers. For example, some parsers - although not the Metamath program - stumble on the fact that the = in 𝑥 = 𝑦 could be the = of either weq 1970 or wceq 1548, although mathematically it makes no difference. The class variables 𝐴 and 𝐵 are introduced temporarily for the purpose of this definition but otherwise not used in predicate calculus. See df-cleq 2733 for more information on the set theory usage of wceq 1548.) |
| wff 𝐴 = 𝐵 | ||
| Syntax | wtru 1549 | The constant ⊤ is a wff. |
| wff ⊤ | ||
| Theorem | trujust 1550 | Soundness justification theorem for df-tru 1551. Instance of monothetic 268. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2013.) (Revised by NM, 11-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥 → ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥) ↔ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Definition | df-tru 1551 | Definition of the truth value "true", or "verum", denoted by ⊤. In this definition, an instance of id 22 is used as the definiens, although any tautology, such as an axiom, can be used in its place. This particular instance of id 22 was chosen so this definition can be checked by the same algorithm that is used for predicate calculus. This definition should be referenced directly only by tru 1552, and other proofs should use tru 1552 instead of this definition, since there are many alternate ways to define ⊤. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 13-Oct-2010.) (Revised by NM, 11-Jul-2019.) Use tru 1552 instead. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (⊤ ↔ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥 → ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | tru 1552 | The truth value ⊤ is provable. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 13-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ ⊤ | ||
| Theorem | dftru2 1553 | An alternate definition of "true" (see comment of df-tru 1551). The associated justification theorem is monothetic 268. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 13-Oct-2010.) (Revised by BJ, 12-Jul-2019.) Use tru 1552 instead. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (⊤ ↔ (𝜑 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | trut 1554 | A proposition is equivalent to it being implied by ⊤. Closed form of mptru 1555. Dual of dfnot 1567. It is to tbtru 1556 what a1bi 364 is to tbt 371. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (⊤ → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | mptru 1555 | Eliminate ⊤ as an antecedent. A proposition implied by ⊤ is true. This is modus ponens ax-mp 5 when the minor hypothesis is ⊤ (which holds by tru 1552). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 13-Mar-2014.) |
| ⊢ (⊤ → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | tbtru 1556 | A proposition is equivalent to itself being equivalent to ⊤. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 14-Aug-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)) | ||
| Theorem | bitru 1557 | A theorem is equivalent to truth. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | trud 1558 | Anything implies ⊤. Dual statement of falim 1565. Deduction form of tru 1552. Note on naming: in 2022, the theorem now known as mptru 1555 was renamed from trud so if you are reading documentation written before that time, references to trud refer to what is now mptru 1555. (Contributed by FL, 20-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by Anthony Hart, 1-Aug-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | truan 1559 | True can be removed from a conjunction. (Contributed by FL, 20-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ∧ 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Syntax | wfal 1560 | The constant ⊥ is a wff. |
| wff ⊥ | ||
| Definition | df-fal 1561 | Definition of the truth value "false", or "falsum", denoted by ⊥. See also df-tru 1551. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ (⊥ ↔ ¬ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | fal 1562 | The truth value ⊥ is refutable. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Mel L. O'Cat, 11-Mar-2012.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ⊥ | ||
| Theorem | nbfal 1563 | The negation of a proposition is equivalent to itself being equivalent to ⊥. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 14-Aug-2011.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)) | ||
| Theorem | bifal 1564 | A contradiction is equivalent to falsehood. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | falim 1565 | The truth value ⊥ implies anything. Also called the "principle of explosion", or "ex falso [sequitur]] quodlibet" (Latin for "from falsehood, anything [follows]]"). Dual statement of trud 1558. (Contributed by FL, 20-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by Anthony Hart, 1-Aug-2011.) |
| ⊢ (⊥ → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | falimd 1566 | The truth value ⊥ implies anything. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ⊥) → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | dfnot 1567 | Given falsum ⊥, we can define the negation of a wff 𝜑 as the statement that ⊥ follows from assuming 𝜑. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 → ⊥)) | ||
| Theorem | inegd 1568 | Negation introduction rule from natural deduction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ⊥) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | efald 1569 | Deduction based on reductio ad absurdum. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → ⊥) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | pm2.21fal 1570 | If a wff and its negation are provable, then falsum is provable. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ⊥) | ||
Some sources define logical connectives by their truth tables. These are tables that give the truth value of the composed expression for all possible combinations of the truth values of their arguments. In this section, we show that our definitions and axioms produce equivalent results for all the logical connectives we have introduced (either axiomatically or by a definition): implication wi 4, negation wn 3, biconditional df-bi 209, conjunction df-an 398, disjunction df-or 855, alternative denial df-nan 1500, exclusive disjunction df-xor 1520. | ||
| Theorem | truimtru 1571 | A → identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) An alternate proof is possible using trud 1558 instead of id 22 but the principle of identity id 22 is more basic, and the present proof indicates that the result still holds in relevance logic. (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ → ⊤) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | truimfal 1572 | A → identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ → ⊥) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | falimtru 1573 | A → identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) An alternate proof is possible using falim 1565 instead of trud 1558 but the present proof using trud 1558 emphasizes that the result does not require the principle of explosion. (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ → ⊤) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | falimfal 1574 | A → identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) An alternate proof is possible using falim 1565 instead of id 22 but the present proof using id 22 emphasizes that the result does not require the principle of explosion. (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ → ⊥) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | nottru 1575 | A ¬ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ⊤ ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | notfal 1576 | A ¬ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ⊥ ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | trubitru 1577 | A ↔ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ↔ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | falbitru 1578 | A ↔ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Jul-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ↔ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | trubifal 1579 | A ↔ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Jul-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ↔ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | falbifal 1580 | A ↔ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ↔ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | truantru 1581 | A ∧ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ∧ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | truanfal 1582 | A ∧ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ∧ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | falantru 1583 | A ∧ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ∧ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | falanfal 1584 | A ∧ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ∧ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | truortru 1585 | A ∨ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ∨ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | truorfal 1586 | A ∨ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ∨ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | falortru 1587 | A ∨ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ∨ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | falorfal 1588 | A ∨ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ∨ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | trunantru 1589 | A ⊼ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ⊼ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | trunanfal 1590 | A ⊼ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 23-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Jul-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ⊼ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | falnantru 1591 | A ⊼ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 23-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ⊼ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | falnanfal 1592 | A ⊼ identity. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ⊼ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | truxortru 1593 | A ⊻ identity. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 8-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ⊻ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | truxorfal 1594 | A ⊻ identity. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 8-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ⊻ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | falxortru 1595 | A ⊻ identity. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 9-May-2015.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Jul-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ⊻ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| Theorem | falxorfal 1596 | A ⊻ identity. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 9-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ⊻ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | trunortru 1597 | A ⊽ identity. (Contributed by Remi, 25-Oct-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 7-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ⊽ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | trunorfal 1598 | A ⊽ identity. (Contributed by Remi, 25-Oct-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((⊤ ⊽ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | falnortru 1599 | A ⊽ identity. (Contributed by Remi, 25-Oct-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ⊽ ⊤) ↔ ⊥) | ||
| Theorem | falnorfal 1600 | A ⊽ identity. (Contributed by Remi, 25-Oct-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((⊥ ⊽ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |