| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 20 of 513) | < 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: | (1-31550) |
(31551-33073) |
(33074-51270) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | exsimpl 1901 | Simplification of an existentially quantified conjunction. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 25-Sep-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 29-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ∃𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | exsimpr 1902 | Simplification of an existentially quantified conjunction. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 25-Sep-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 29-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ∃𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | 19.26 1903 | Theorem 19.26 of [Margaris] p. 90. Also Theorem *10.22 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 147. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jul-2014.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.26-2 1904 | Theorem 19.26 1903 with two quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 3-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.26-3an 1905 | Theorem 19.26 1903 with triple conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 13-Sep-2011.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | hban 1906 | If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑 and 𝜓, it is not free in (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓). (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2018.) Reduce axiom dependencies. (Revised by SN and Sky Winter, 22-Oct-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | hb3an 1907 | If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑, 𝜓, and 𝜒, it is not free in (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒). (Contributed by NM, 14-Sep-2003.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2018.) Reduce axiom dependencies. (Revised by SN and Sky Winter, 23-Oct-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.29 1908 | Theorem 19.29 of [Margaris] p. 90. See also 19.29r 1909. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓) → ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.29r 1909 | Variation of 19.29 1908. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Nov-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.29r2 1910 | Variation of 19.29r 1909 with double quantification. (Contributed by NM, 3-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓) → ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.29x 1911 | Variation of 19.29 1908 with mixed quantification. (Contributed by NM, 11-Feb-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((∃𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃𝑦𝜓) → ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.35 1912 | 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 1913 | Inference associated with 19.35 1912. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | 19.35ri 1914 | Inference associated with 19.35 1912. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | 19.25 1915 | Theorem 19.25 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑦∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑦∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑦∃𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.30 1916 | 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 1917 | 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 1918 | Obsolete proof of 19.43 1917. Do not delete as it is referenced on the mmrecent.html 1917 page and in conventions-labels 31032. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.33 1919 | Theorem 19.33 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.33b 1920 | The antecedent provides a condition implying the converse of 19.33 1919. (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 1921 | Theorem 19.40 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.40-2 1922 | 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 1923 | The antecedent provides a condition implying the converse of 19.40 1921. This is to 19.40 1921 what 19.33b 1920 is to 19.33 1919. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Nov-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ((∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓) ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | albiim 1924 | Split a biconditional and distribute quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | 2albiim 1925 | 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 1926 | 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 1927 | 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 1928 | 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 1929 | If in a context 𝑥 is not free in 𝜓 and 𝜒, then it is not free in (𝜓 → 𝜒). Deduction form of nfim 1931. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Sep-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 30-Dec-2017.) df-nf 1817 changed. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 18-Sep-2021.) Eliminate curried form of nfimt 1930. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 10-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | nfimt 1930 | Closed form of nfim 1931 and nfimd 1929. (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 1931 | If 𝑥 is not free in 𝜑 and 𝜓, then it is not free in (𝜑 → 𝜓). Inference associated with nfimt 1930. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2018.) df-nf 1817 changed. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 17-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | nfand 1932 | 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 1933 | Deduction form of bound-variable hypothesis builder nf3an 1936. (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 1934 | 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 1935 | 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 1936 | 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 1937 | 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 1938 | 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 1939 | 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 1940 | 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) | ||
This database develops mathematics from first-order logic, which has only nonempty models. Before stating axioms excluding the empty model (typically, ax-6 2002 in logic and ax-nul 5263 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 1943) and every existential formula is false (emptyex 1942), and every variable is effectively nonfree in any formula (emptynf 1944). | ||
| Theorem | empty 1941 | Two characterizations of the empty domain. (Contributed by Gérard Lang, 5-Feb-2024.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥⊥) | ||
| Theorem | emptyex 1942 | On the empty domain, any existentially quantified formula is false. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ → ¬ ∃𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | emptyal 1943 | On the empty domain, any universally quantified formula is true. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 12-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ → ∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | emptynf 1944 | On the empty domain, any variable is effectively nonfree in any formula. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 12-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ → Ⅎ𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Axiom | ax-5 1945* |
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 40156 about the logical redundancy of ax-5 1945 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 2223, we can also remove the quantifier (unconditionally). For an explanation of disjoint variable conditions, see https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmset.html#distinct 2223. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | ax5d 1946* | Version of ax-5 1945 with antecedent. Useful in proofs of deduction versions of bound-variable hypothesis builders. (Contributed by NM, 1-Mar-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | ax5e 1947* | A rephrasing of ax-5 1945 using the existential quantifier. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | ax5ea 1948* | 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 1949* | 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 1950* | nfv 1949 with antecedent. Useful in proofs of deduction versions of bound-variable hypothesis builders such as nfimd 1929. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | alimdv 1951* | Deduction form of Theorem 19.20 of [Margaris] p. 90, see alim 1843. See alimdh 1850 and alimd 2252 for versions without a distinct variable condition. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | eximdv 1952* | Deduction form of Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p. 90, see exim 1867. See eximdh 1897 and eximd 2256 for versions without a distinct variable condition. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 2alimdv 1953* | Deduction form of Theorem 19.20 of [Margaris] p. 90 with two quantifiers, see alim 1843. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 2eximdv 1954* | Deduction form of Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p. 90 with two quantifiers, see exim 1867. (Contributed by NM, 3-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓 → ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | albidv 1955* | Formula-building rule for universal quantifier (deduction form). See also albidh 1899 and albid 2262. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | exbidv 1956* | Formula-building rule for existential quantifier (deduction form). See also exbidh 1900 and exbid 2263. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | nfbidv 1957* | An equality theorem for nonfreeness. See nfbidf 2264 for a version without disjoint variable condition but requiring more axioms. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) Remove dependency on ax-6 2002, ax-7 2043, ax-12 2216 by adapting proof of nfbidf 2264. (Revised by BJ, 25-Sep-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ↔ Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 2albidv 1958* | 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 1959* | 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 1960* | 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 1961* | 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 1962* | Inference form of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. See 19.21 2247 and 19.21v 1974. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | alrimivv 1963* | Inference form of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. See 19.21 2247 and 19.21v 1974. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | alrimdv 1964* | Deduction form of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90. See 19.21 2247 and 19.21v 1974. (Contributed by NM, 10-Feb-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | exlimiv 1965* |
Inference form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris]
p. 90, see 19.23 2251.
See exlimi 2257 for a more general version requiring more axioms. This inference, along with its many variants such as rexlimdv 3165, 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 3165. 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 1965 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 1966. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) Remove dependencies on ax-6 2002 and ax-8 2149. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | exlimiiv 1966* | Inference (Rule C) associated with exlimiv 1965. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Dec-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ 𝜓 | ||
| Theorem | exlimivv 1967* | Inference form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90, see 19.23 2251. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | exlimdv 1968* | Deduction form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90, see 19.23 2251. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) Remove dependencies on ax-6 2002, ax-7 2043. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | exlimdvv 1969* | Deduction form of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90, see 19.23 2251. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | exlimddv 1970* | Existential elimination rule of natural deduction (Rule C, explained in exlimiv 1965). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-Jun-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | nexdv 1971* | 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 1972* | 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 1973* | Version of stdpc5 2248 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Mar-2020.) Revised to shorten 19.21v 1974. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 12-Jul-2020.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.21v 1974* |
Version of 19.21 2247 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 1817) instead of a disjoint variable condition. For instance, 19.21v 1974 versus 19.21 2247 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 1949. 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 1975* | Version of 19.32 2273 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Mar-2020.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.31v 1976* | Version of 19.31 2274 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Mar-2020.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.23v 1977* | Version of 19.23 2251 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 2002. (Revised by Rohan Ridenour, 15-Apr-2022.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.23vv 1978* | Theorem 19.23v 1977 extended to two variables. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-2004.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | pm11.53v 1979* | Version of pm11.53 2379 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Mar-2020.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.36imv 1980* | One direction of 19.36v 2028 that can be proven without ax-6 2002. (Contributed by Rohan Ridenour, 16-Apr-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 22-Sep-2024.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.36iv 1981* | Inference associated with 19.36v 2028. Version of 19.36i 2271 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 2002. (Revised by Rohan Ridenour, 15-Apr-2022.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | 19.37imv 1982* | One direction of 19.37v 2032 that can be proven without ax-6 2002. (Contributed by Rohan Ridenour, 16-Apr-2022.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.37iv 1983* | Inference associated with 19.37v 2032. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) Remove dependency on ax-6 2002. (Revised by Rohan Ridenour, 15-Apr-2022.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | 19.41v 1984* | Version of 19.41 2275 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) Remove dependency on ax-6 2002. (Revised by Rohan Ridenour, 15-Apr-2022.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.41vv 1985* | Version of 19.41 2275 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 1986* | Version of 19.41 2275 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 1987* | Version of 19.41 2275 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 1988* | Version of 19.42 2276 with a disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | exdistr 1989* | Distribution of existential quantifiers. See also exdistrv 1990. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | exdistrv 1990* | Distribute a pair of existential quantifiers (over disjoint variables) over a conjunction. Combination of 19.41v 1984 and 19.42v 1988. For a version with fewer disjoint variable conditions but requiring more axioms, see eeanv 2382. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 4exdistrv 1991* | 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 2384. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Jan-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑧∃𝑦∃𝑤(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.42vv 1992* | Version of 19.42 2276 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 1993* | Distribution of existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 19.42vvv 1994* | Version of 19.42 2276 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 1995* | 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 1996* | 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)))) | ||
The equality predicate was introduced above in wceq 1570 for use by df-tru 1573. See the comments in that section. In this section, we continue with its first "real" use. | ||
| Theorem | weq 1997 |
Extend wff definition to include atomic formulas using the equality
predicate.
(Instead of introducing weq 1997 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 1570. This lets us avoid overloading the = connective, thus preventing ambiguity that would complicate certain Metamath parsers. However, logically weq 1997 is considered to be a primitive syntax, even though here it is artificially "derived" from wceq 1570. 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 1998 | Specialization, with additional weakening (compared to 19.2 2011) 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 1999 | Alternate proof of speimfw 1998 (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 2000 | Specialization, with additional weakening (compared to sp 2223) 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)) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |