P. 20 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 1901-2000   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	19.29 1901	Theorem 19.29 of [Margaris] p. 90. See also 19.29r 1902. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓) → ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.29r 1902	Variation of 19.29 1901. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Nov-2020.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.29r2 1903	Variation of 19.29r 1902 with double quantification. (Contributed by NM, 3-Feb-2005.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓) → ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.29x 1904	Variation of 19.29 1901 with mixed quantification. (Contributed by NM, 11-Feb-2005.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃𝑦𝜓) → ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.35 1905	Theorem 19.35 of [Margaris] p. 90. This theorem is useful for moving an implication (in the form of the right-hand side) into the scope of a single existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2014.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.35i 1906	Inference associated with 19.35 1905. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	19.35ri 1907	Inference associated with 19.35 1905. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	19.25 1908	Theorem 19.25 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑦∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑦∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑦∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.30 1909	Theorem 19.30 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.43 1910	Theorem 19.43 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2014.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.43OLD 1911	Obsolete proof of 19.43 1910. Do not delete as it is referenced on the mmrecent.html 1910 page and in conventions-labels 30718. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.33 1912	Theorem 19.33 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.33b 1913	The antecedent provides a condition implying the converse of 19.33 1912. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jul-2014.)
⊢ (¬ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓) → (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	19.40 1914	Theorem 19.40 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.40-2 1915	Theorem *11.42 in [WhiteheadRussell] p. 163. Theorem 19.40 of [Margaris] p. 90 with two quantifiers. (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 24-May-2011.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	19.40b 1916	The antecedent provides a condition implying the converse of 19.40 1914. This is to 19.40 1914 what 19.33b 1913 is to 19.33 1912. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Nov-2020.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ((∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓) ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)))
Theorem	albiim 1917	Split a biconditional and distribute quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜑)))
Theorem	2albiim 1918	Split a biconditional and distribute two quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 3-Feb-2005.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜓 → 𝜑)))
Theorem	exintrbi 1919	Add/remove a conjunct in the scope of an existential quantifier. (Contributed by Raph Levien, 3-Jul-2006.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)))
Theorem	exintr 1920	Introduce a conjunct in the scope of an existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 11-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 16-Sep-2022.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)))
Theorem	alsyl 1921	Universally quantified and uncurried (imported) form of syllogism. Theorem *10.3 in [WhiteheadRussell] p. 150. (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒)) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜒))
Theorem	nfimd 1922	If in a context 𝑥 is not free in 𝜓 and 𝜒, then it is not free in (𝜓 → 𝜒). Deduction form of nfim 1924. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Sep-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 30-Dec-2017.) df-nf 1812 changed. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 18-Sep-2021.) Eliminate curried form of nfimt 1923. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 10-Jul-2022.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒))
Theorem	nfimt 1923	Closed form of nfim 1924 and nfimd 1922. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) Eliminate curried form, former name nfimt2. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 6-Jul-2022.)
⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ∧ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) → Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	nfim 1924	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑 and 𝜓, then it is not free in (𝜑 → 𝜓). Inference associated with nfimt 1923. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2018.) df-nf 1812 changed. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 17-Sep-2021.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	nfand 1925	If in a context 𝑥 is not free in 𝜓 and 𝜒, then it is not free in (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥(𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))
Theorem	nf3and 1926	Deduction form of bound-variable hypothesis builder nf3an 1929. (Contributed by NM, 17-Feb-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 16-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥(𝜓 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃))
Theorem	nfan 1927	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑 and 𝜓, then it is not free in (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Jan-2018.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 9-Oct-2021.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	nfnan 1928	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑 and 𝜓, then it is not free in (𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓). (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 2-Jan-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓)
Theorem	nf3an 1929	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑, 𝜓, and 𝜒, then it is not free in (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)
Theorem	nfbid 1930	If in a context 𝑥 is not free in 𝜓 and 𝜒, then it is not free in (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Sep-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 29-Dec-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥(𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	nfbi 1931	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑 and 𝜓, then it is not free in (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓). (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	nfor 1932	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑 and 𝜓, then it is not free in (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓). (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)
Theorem	nf3or 1933	If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑, 𝜓, and 𝜒, then it is not free in (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)
1.4.3.1  The empty domain of discourse This database develops mathematics from first-order logic, which has only nonempty models. Before stating axioms excluding the empty model (typically, ax-6 1995 in logic and ax-nul 5268 in set theory), we state in this short subsection a few results relative to the empty domain, which we characterize by the assumption ¬ ∃𝑥⊤. As expected, on the empty domain, every universally quantified formula is true (emptyal 1936) and every existential formula is false (emptyex 1935), and every variable is effectively nonfree in any formula (emptynf 1937).
Theorem	empty 1934	Two characterizations of the empty domain. (Contributed by Gérard Lang, 5-Feb-2024.)
⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥⊥)
Theorem	emptyex 1935	On the empty domain, any existentially quantified formula is false. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jan-2024.)
⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ → ¬ ∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	emptyal 1936	On the empty domain, any universally quantified formula is true. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 12-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ → ∀𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	emptynf 1937	On the empty domain, any variable is effectively nonfree in any formula. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 12-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ → Ⅎ𝑥𝜑)
1.4.4  Axiom scheme ax-5 (Distinctness) - first use of $d
Axiom	ax-5 1938*	Axiom of Distinctness. This axiom quantifies a variable over a formula in which it does not occur. Axiom C5 in [Megill] p. 444 (p. 11 of the preprint). Also appears as Axiom B6 (p. 75) of system S2 of [Tarski] p. 77 and Axiom C5-1 of [Monk2] p. 113. (See comments in ax5ALT 39649 about the logical redundancy of ax-5 1938 in the presence of our obsolete axioms.) This axiom essentially says that if 𝑥 does not occur in 𝜑, i.e. 𝜑 does not depend on 𝑥 in any way, then we can add the quantifier ∀𝑥 to 𝜑 with no further assumptions. By sp 2217, we can also remove the quantifier (unconditionally). For an explanation of disjoint variable conditions, see https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmset.html#distinct 2217. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	ax5d 1939*	Version of ax-5 1938 with antecedent. Useful in proofs of deduction versions of bound-variable hypothesis builders. (Contributed by NM, 1-Mar-2013.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	ax5e 1940*	A rephrasing of ax-5 1938 using the existential quantifier. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2017.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑)
Theorem	ax5ea 1941*	If a formula holds for some value of a variable not occurring in it, then it holds for all values of that variable. (Contributed by BJ, 28-Dec-2020.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	nfv 1942*	If 𝑥 is not present in 𝜑, then 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) Definition change. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 12-Sep-2021.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑
Theorem	nfvd 1943*	nfv 1942 with antecedent. Useful in proofs of deduction versions of bound-variable hypothesis builders such as nfimd 1922. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	alimdv 1944*	Deduction form of Theorem 19.20 of [Margaris] p. 90, see alim 1838. See alimdh 1845 and alimd 2246 for versions without a distinct variable condition. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	eximdv 1945*	Deduction form of Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p. 90, see exim 1862. See eximdh 1892 and eximd 2250 for versions without a distinct variable condition. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	2alimdv 1946*	Deduction form of Theorem 19.20 of [Margaris] p. 90 with two quantifiers, see alim 1838. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-2004.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	2eximdv 1947*	Deduction form of Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p. 90 with two quantifiers, see exim 1862. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓 → ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	albidv 1948*	Formula-building rule for universal quantifier (deduction form). See also albidh 1894 and albid 2256. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	exbidv 1949*	Formula-building rule for existential quantifier (deduction form). See also exbidh 1895 and exbid 2257. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	nfbidv 1950*	An equality theorem for nonfreeness. See nfbidf 2258 for a version without disjoint variable condition but requiring more axioms. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) Remove dependency on ax-6 1995, ax-7 2036, ax-12 2211 by adapting proof of nfbidf 2258. (Revised by BJ, 25-Sep-2022.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ↔ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	2albidv 1951*	Formula-building rule for two universal quantifiers (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 4-Mar-1997.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	2exbidv 1952*	Formula-building rule for two existential quantifiers (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 1-May-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	3exbidv 1953*	Formula-building rule for three existential quantifiers (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 1-May-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜒))
Theorem	4exbidv 1954*	Formula-building rule for four existential quantifiers (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜒))
Theorem	alrimiv 1955*	Inference form of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. See 19.21 2241 and 19.21v 1967. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	alrimivv 1956*	Inference form of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. See 19.21 2241 and 19.21v 1967. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	alrimdv 1957*	Deduction form of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. See 19.21 2241 and 19.21v 1967. (Contributed by NM, 10-Feb-1997.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	exlimiv 1958*	Inference form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90, see 19.23 2245. See exlimi 2251 for a more general version requiring more axioms. This inference, along with its many variants such as rexlimdv 3162, is used to implement a metatheorem called "Rule C" that is given in many logic textbooks. See, for example, Rule C in [Mendelson] p. 81, Rule C in [Margaris] p. 40, or Rule C in Hirst and Hirst's A Primer for Logic and Proof p. 59 (PDF p. 65) at http://www.appstate.edu/~hirstjl/primer/hirst.pdf 3162. In informal proofs, the statement "Let 𝐶 be an element such that..." almost always means an implicit application of Rule C. In essence, Rule C states that if we can prove that some element 𝑥 exists satisfying a wff, i.e. ∃𝑥𝜑(𝑥) where 𝜑(𝑥) has 𝑥 free, then we can use 𝜑(𝐶) as a hypothesis for the proof where 𝐶 is a new (fictitious) constant not appearing previously in the proof, nor in any axioms used, nor in the theorem to be proved. The purpose of Rule C is to get rid of the existential quantifier. We cannot do this in Metamath directly. Instead, we use the original 𝜑 (containing 𝑥) as an antecedent for the main part of the proof. We eventually arrive at (𝜑 → 𝜓) where 𝜓 is the theorem to be proved and does not contain 𝑥. Then we apply exlimiv 1958 to arrive at (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓). Finally, we separately prove ∃𝑥𝜑 and detach it with modus ponens ax-mp 5 to arrive at the final theorem 𝜓, see exlimiiv 1959. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) Remove dependencies on ax-6 1995 and ax-8 2143. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	exlimiiv 1959*	Inference (Rule C) associated with exlimiv 1958. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Dec-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜓
Theorem	exlimivv 1960*	Inference form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90, see 19.23 2245. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	exlimdv 1961*	Deduction form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90, see 19.23 2245. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) Remove dependencies on ax-6 1995, ax-7 2036. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒))
Theorem	exlimdvv 1962*	Deduction form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90, see 19.23 2245. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓 → 𝜒))
Theorem	exlimddv 1963*	Existential elimination rule of natural deduction (Rule C, explained in exlimiv 1958). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-Jun-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)
Theorem	nexdv 1964*	Deduction for generalization rule for negated wff. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 13-Jul-2020.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 10-Oct-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∃𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	2ax5 1965*	Quantification of two variables over a formula in which they do not occur. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 12-Apr-2011.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	stdpc5v 1966*	Version of stdpc5 2242 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Mar-2020.) Revised to shorten 19.21v 1967. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 12-Jul-2020.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.21v 1967*	Version of 19.21 2241 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. Notational convention: We sometimes suffix with "v" the label of a theorem using a distinct variable ("dv") condition instead of a nonfreeness hypothesis such as Ⅎ𝑥𝜑. Conversely, we sometimes suffix with "f" the label of a theorem introducing such a nonfreeness hypothesis ("f" stands for "not free in", see df-nf 1812) instead of a disjoint variable condition. For instance, 19.21v 1967 versus 19.21 2241 and vtoclf 3529 versus vtocl 3524. Note that "not free in" is less restrictive than "does not occur in". Note that the version with a disjoint variable condition is easily proved from the version with the corresponding nonfreeness hypothesis, by using nfv 1942. However, the dv version can often be proved from fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2020.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Jul-2020.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.32v 1968*	Version of 19.32 2267 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Mar-2020.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.31v 1969*	Version of 19.31 2268 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Mar-2020.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.23v 1970*	Version of 19.23 2245 with a disjoint variable condition instead of a nonfreeness hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 28-Jun-1998.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 11-Jan-2020.) Remove dependency on ax-6 1995. (Revised by Rohan Ridenour, 15-Apr-2022.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	19.23vv 1971*	Theorem 19.23v 1970 extended to two variables. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-2004.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	pm11.53v 1972*	Version of pm11.53 2376 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Mar-2020.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	19.36imv 1973*	One direction of 19.36v 2021 that can be proven without ax-6 1995. (Contributed by Rohan Ridenour, 16-Apr-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 22-Sep-2024.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	19.36iv 1974*	Inference associated with 19.36v 2021. Version of 19.36i 2265 with a disjoint variable condition. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 17-Jan-2020.) Remove dependency on ax-6 1995. (Revised by Rohan Ridenour, 15-Apr-2022.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	19.37imv 1975*	One direction of 19.37v 2025 that can be proven without ax-6 1995. (Contributed by Rohan Ridenour, 16-Apr-2022.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	19.37iv 1976*	Inference associated with 19.37v 2025. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) Remove dependency on ax-6 1995. (Revised by Rohan Ridenour, 15-Apr-2022.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	19.41v 1977*	Version of 19.41 2269 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) Remove dependency on ax-6 1995. (Revised by Rohan Ridenour, 15-Apr-2022.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.41vv 1978*	Version of 19.41 2269 with two quantifiers and a disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 30-Apr-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.41vvv 1979*	Version of 19.41 2269 with three quantifiers and a disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 30-Apr-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.41vvvv 1980*	Version of 19.41 2269 with four quantifiers and a disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by FL, 14-Jul-2007.)
⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑤∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	19.42v 1981*	Version of 19.42 2270 with a disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	exdistr 1982*	Distribution of existential quantifiers. See also exdistrv 1983. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	exdistrv 1983*	Distribute a pair of existential quantifiers (over disjoint variables) over a conjunction. Combination of 19.41v 1977 and 19.42v 1981. For a version with fewer disjoint variable conditions but requiring more axioms, see eeanv 2379. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	4exdistrv 1984*	Distribute two pairs of existential quantifiers (over disjoint variables) over a conjunction. For a version with fewer disjoint variable conditions but requiring more axioms, see ee4anv 2381. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Jan-2023.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑧∃𝑦∃𝑤(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜓))
Theorem	19.42vv 1985*	Version of 19.42 2270 with two quantifiers and a disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	exdistr2 1986*	Distribution of existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	19.42vvv 1987*	Version of 19.42 2270 with three quantifiers and a disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 21-Sep-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Aug-2023.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	3exdistr 1988*	Distribution of existential quantifiers in a triple conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦(𝜓 ∧ ∃𝑧𝜒)))
Theorem	4exdistr 1989*	Distribution of existential quantifiers in a quadruple conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Jan-2018.)
⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦(𝜓 ∧ ∃𝑧(𝜒 ∧ ∃𝑤𝜃))))
1.4.5  Equality predicate (continued) The equality predicate was introduced above in wceq 1568 for use by df-tru 1571. See the comments in that section. In this section, we continue with its first "real" use.
Theorem	weq 1990	Extend wff definition to include atomic formulas using the equality predicate. (Instead of introducing weq 1990 as an axiomatic statement, as was done in an older version of this database, we introduce it by "proving" a special case of set theory's more general wceq 1568. This lets us avoid overloading the = connective, thus preventing ambiguity that would complicate certain Metamath parsers. However, logically weq 1990 is considered to be a primitive syntax, even though here it is artificially "derived" from wceq 1568. Note: To see the proof steps of this syntax proof, type "MM> SHOW PROOF weq / ALL" in the Metamath program.) (Contributed by NM, 24-Jan-2006.)
wff 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	speimfw 1991	Specialization, with additional weakening (compared to 19.2 2004) to allow bundling of 𝑥 and 𝑦. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. (Contributed by NM, 23-Apr-2017.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Dec-2017.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	speimfwALT 1992	Alternate proof of speimfw 1991 (longer compressed proof, but fewer essential steps). (Contributed by NM, 23-Apr-2017.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Aug-2017.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	spimfw 1993	Specialization, with additional weakening (compared to sp 2217) to allow bundling of 𝑥 and 𝑦. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. (Contributed by NM, 23-Apr-2017.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 7-Aug-2017.)
⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	ax12i 1994	Inference that has ax-12 2211 (without ∀𝑦) as its conclusion. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. The hypotheses may be eliminable without using ax-12 2211 in special cases. Proof similar to Lemma 16 of [Tarski] p. 70. (Contributed by NM, 20-May-2008.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))
1.4.6  Axiom scheme ax-6 (Existence)
Axiom	ax-6 1995	Axiom of Existence. One of the equality and substitution axioms of predicate calculus with equality. This axiom tells us that at least one thing exists. In this form (not requiring that 𝑥 and 𝑦 be distinct) it was used in an axiom system of Tarski (see Axiom B7' in footnote 1 of [KalishMontague] p. 81.) It is equivalent to axiom scheme C10' in [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of the preprint); the equivalence is established by axc10 2415 and ax6fromc10 39638. A more convenient form of this axiom is ax6e 2413, which has additional remarks. Raph Levien proved the independence of this axiom from the other logical axioms on 12-Apr-2005. See item 16 at https://us.metamath.org/award2003.html 2413. ax-6 1995 can be proved from the weaker version ax6v 1996 requiring that the variables be distinct; see Theorem ax6 2414. ax-6 1995 can also be proved from the Axiom of Separation (in the form that we use that axiom, where free variables are not universally quantified). See Theorem ax6vsep 5265. Except by ax6v 1996, this axiom should not be referenced directly. Instead, use Theorem ax6 2414. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	ax6v 1996*	Axiom B7 of [Tarski] p. 75, which requires that 𝑥 and 𝑦 be distinct. This trivial proof is intended merely to weaken Axiom ax-6 1995 by adding a distinct variable restriction ($d). From here on, ax-6 1995 should not be referenced directly by any other proof, so that Theorem ax6 2414 will show that we can recover ax-6 1995 from this weaker version if it were an axiom (as it is in the case of Tarski). Note: Introducing 𝑥, 𝑦 as a distinct variable group "out of the blue" with no apparent justification has puzzled some people, but it is perfectly sound. All we are doing is adding an additional prerequisite, similar to adding an unnecessary logical hypothesis, that results in a weakening of the theorem. This means that any future theorem that references ax6v 1996 must have a $d specified for the two variables that get substituted for 𝑥 and 𝑦. The $d does not propagate "backwards", i.e., it does not impose a requirement on ax-6 1995. When possible, use of this theorem rather than ax6 2414 is preferred since its derivation is much shorter and requires fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2015.)
⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	ax6ev 1997*	At least one individual exists. Weaker version of ax6e 2413. When possible, use of this theorem rather than ax6e 2413 is preferred since its derivation is much shorter and requires fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-2017.)
⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	spimw 1998*	Specialization. Lemma 8 of [KalishMontague] p. 87. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. (Contributed by NM, 19-Apr-2017.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 7-Aug-2017.)
⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	spimew 1999*	Existential introduction, using implicit substitution. Compare Lemma 14 of [Tarski] p. 70. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 22-Oct-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	speiv 2000*	Inference from existential specialization. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) Use spimew 1999. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 22-Oct-2023.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → 𝜑))    &   ⊢ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑