| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 26 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: | (1-31067) |
(31068-32590) |
(32591-50390) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | 2ax6e 2501* | We can always find values matching 𝑥 and 𝑦, as long as they are represented by distinct variables. Version of 2ax6elem 2500 with a distinct variable constraint. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Sep-2018.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑧∃𝑤(𝑧 = 𝑥 ∧ 𝑤 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | 2sb5rf 2502* | Reversed double substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 3-Feb-2005.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) Remove distinct variable constraints. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 28-Sep-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑤((𝑧 = 𝑥 ∧ 𝑤 = 𝑦) ∧ [𝑧 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | 2sb6rf 2503* | Reversed double substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 3-Feb-2005.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) Remove variable constraints. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 28-Sep-2018.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Apr-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧∀𝑤((𝑧 = 𝑥 ∧ 𝑤 = 𝑦) → [𝑧 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbel2x 2504* | Elimination of double substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 29-Sep-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑤][𝑥 / 𝑧]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb4b 2505 | Simplified definition of substitution when variables are distinct. Version of sb6 2117 with a distinctor antecedent. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 27-May-1997.) Revise df-sb 2090. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 21-Feb-2024.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑡 → ([𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | sb3b 2506 | Simplified definition of substitution when variables are distinct. This is the biconditional strengthening of sb3 2507. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) Shorten sb3 2507. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 21-Feb-2021.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | sb3 2507 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution when variables are distinct. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Feb-2024.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb1 2508 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution. The converse requires either a disjoint variable condition (sb5 2309) or a nonfreeness hypothesis (sb5f 2528). Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use the weaker sb1v 2119 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 13-May-1993.) Revise df-sb 2090. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 21-Feb-2024.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb2 2509 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution. The converse requires either a disjoint variable condition (sb6 2117) or a nonfreeness hypothesis (sb6f 2527). Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 13-May-1993.) Revise df-sb 2090. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb4a 2510 | A version of one implication of sb4b 2505 that does not require a distinctor antecedent. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use the weaker sb4av 2278 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) Revise df-sb 2090. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑡 / 𝑥]∀𝑡𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑡 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | dfsb1 2511 | Alternate definition of substitution. Remark 9.1 in [Megill] p. 447 (p. 15 of the preprint). This was the original definition before df-sb 2090. Note that it does not require dummy variables in its definiens; this is done by having 𝑥 free in the first conjunct and bound in the second. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Jul-2023.) Revise df-sb 2090. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 29-Jul-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ((𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∧ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | hbsb2 2512 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nfsb2 2513 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | hbsb2a 2514 | Special case of a bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb4e 2515 | One direction of a simplified definition of substitution that unlike sb4b 2505 does not require a distinctor antecedent. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | hbsb2e 2516 | Special case of a bound-variable hypothesis builder for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]∃𝑦𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | hbsb3 2517 | If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Check out bj-hbsb3v 37264 for a weaker version requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | nfs1 2518 | If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Check out nfs1v 2189 for a version requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | axc16ALT 2519* | Alternate proof of axc16 2295, shorter but requiring ax-10 2174, ax-11 2190, ax-13 2402 and using df-nf 1803 and df-sb 2090. (Contributed by NM, 17-May-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | axc16gALT 2520* | Alternate proof of axc16g 2294 that uses df-sb 2090 and requires ax-10 2174, ax-11 2190, ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑧𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | equsb1 2521 | Substitution applied to an atomic wff. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use the weaker equsb1v 2138 if possible. (Contributed by NM, 10-May-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | equsb2 2522 | Substitution applied to an atomic wff. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Check out equsb1v 2138 for a version requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 10-May-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝑦 = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | dfsb2 2523 | An alternate definition of proper substitution that, like dfsb1 2511, mixes free and bound variables to avoid distinct variable requirements. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 17-Feb-2005.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ((𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ∨ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | dfsb3 2524 | An alternate definition of proper substitution df-sb 2090 that uses only primitive connectives (no defined terms) on the right-hand side. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 6-Mar-2007.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ((𝑥 = 𝑦 → ¬ 𝜑) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | drsb1 2525 | Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. Part of Theorem 9.4 of [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of preprint). Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb2ae 2526* | In the case of two successive substitutions for two always equal variables, the second substitution has no effect. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by BJ and WL, 9-Aug-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑢 / 𝑥][𝑣 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ [𝑣 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb6f 2527 | Equivalence for substitution when 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑. The implication "to the left" is sb2 2509 and does not require the nonfreeness hypothesis. Theorem sb6 2117 replaces the nonfreeness hypothesis with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑦 and requires fewer axioms. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sb5f 2528 | Equivalence for substitution when 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑. The implication "to the right" is sb1 2508 and does not require the nonfreeness hypothesis. Theorem sb5 2309 replaces the nonfreeness hypothesis with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑦 and requires fewer axioms. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nfsb4t 2529 | A variable not free in a proposition remains so after substitution in that proposition with a distinct variable (closed form of nfsb4 2530). Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 7-Apr-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 11-May-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 → (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nfsb4 2530 | A variable not free in a proposition remains so after substitution in that proposition with a distinct variable (inference associated with nfsb4t 2529). Theorem nfsb 2553 replaces the distinctor antecedent with a disjoint variable condition. See nfsbv 2361 for a weaker version of nfsb 2553 not requiring ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use nfsbv 2361 instead. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbequ8 2531 | Elimination of equality from antecedent after substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2018.) Revise df-sb 2090. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥](𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbie 2532 | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution. For versions requiring disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see sbiev 2345 and sbievw 2126. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Jul-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | sbied 2533 | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution (deduction version of sbie 2532) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. See sbiedw 2347, sbiedvw 2128 for variants using disjoint variables, but requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 4-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Jun-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | sbiedv 2534* | Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution (deduction version of sbie 2532). Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use the weaker sbiedvw 2128 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 7-Jan-2017.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | 2sbiev 2535* | Conversion of double implicit substitution to explicit substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. See 2sbievw 2129 for a version with extra disjoint variables, but based on fewer axioms. (Contributed by AV, 29-Jul-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑢) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑡 / 𝑥][𝑢 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | sbcom3 2536 | Substituting 𝑦 for 𝑥 and then 𝑧 for 𝑦 is equivalent to substituting 𝑧 for both 𝑥 and 𝑦. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. For a version requiring a disjoint variable, but fewer axioms, see sbcom3vv 2130. (Contributed by Giovanni Mascellani, 8-Apr-2018.) Remove dependency on ax-11 2190. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 16-Sep-2018.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 16-Sep-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑧 / 𝑦][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑦][𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbco 2537 | A composition law for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. See sbcov 2290 for a version with a disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Sep-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbid2 2538 | An identity law for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Check out sbid2vw 2293 for a weaker version requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 14-May-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbid2v 2539* | An identity law for substitution. Used in proof of Theorem 9.7 of [Megill] p. 449 (p. 16 of the preprint). Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. See sbid2vw 2293 for a version with an extra disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbidm 2540 | An idempotent law for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Jul-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbco2 2541 | A composition law for substitution. For versions requiring fewer axioms, but more disjoint variable conditions, see sbco2v 2362 and sbco2vv 2132. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jun-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 17-Sep-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑧][𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbco2d 2542 | A composition law for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑧𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑧][𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | sbco3 2543 | A composition law for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Sep-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑧 / 𝑦][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbcom 2544 | A commutativity law for substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Check out sbcom3vv 2130 for a version requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 27-May-1997.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑧][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑦 / 𝑧]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbtrt 2545 | Partially closed form of sbtr 2546. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Jun-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbtr 2546 | A partial converse to sbt 2094. If the substitution of a variable for a nonfree one in a wff gives a theorem, then the original wff is a theorem. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | sb8 2547 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. For a version requiring disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see sb8f 2384. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb8e 2548 | Substitution of variable in existential quantifier. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. For a version requiring disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see sb8ef 2385. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Jim Kingdon, 15-Jan-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb9 2549 | Commutation of quantification and substitution variables. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) Allow a shortening of sb9i 2550. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 15-Jun-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥[𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb9i 2550 | Commutation of quantification and substitution variables. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 15-Jun-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥[𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 → ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sbhb 2551* | Two ways of expressing "𝑥 is (effectively) not free in 𝜑". Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 29-May-2009.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nfsbd 2552* | Deduction version of nfsb 2553. (Contributed by NM, 15-Feb-2013.) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use nfsbv 2361 instead. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑧𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | nfsb 2553* | If 𝑧 is not free in 𝜑, then it is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 when 𝑦 and 𝑧 are distinct. See nfsbv 2361 for a version with an additional disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑧 but not requiring ax-13 2402. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Feb-2024.) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use nfsbv 2361 instead. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | hbsb 2554* | If 𝑧 is not free in 𝜑, then it is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 when 𝑦 and 𝑧 are distinct. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use hbsbw 2204 instead. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑧𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sb7f 2555* | This version of dfsb7 2312 does not require that 𝜑 and 𝑧 be disjoint. This permits it to be used as a definition for substitution in a formalization that omits the logically redundant axiom ax-5 1929, i.e., that does not have the concept of a variable not occurring in a formula. (Definition dfsb1 2511 is also suitable, but its mixing of free and bound variables is distasteful to some logicians.) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jul-2006.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧(𝑧 = 𝑦 ∧ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | sb7h 2556* | This version of dfsb7 2312 does not require that 𝜑 and 𝑧 be disjoint. This permits it to be used as a definition for substitution in a formalization that omits the logically redundant axiom ax-5 1929, i.e., that does not have the concept of a variable not occurring in a formula. (Definition dfsb1 2511 is also suitable, but its mixing of free and bound variables is distasteful to some logicians.) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jul-2006.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑧𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧(𝑧 = 𝑦 ∧ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | sb10f 2557* | Hao Wang's identity axiom P6 in Irving Copi, Symbolic Logic (5th ed., 1979), p. 328. In traditional predicate calculus, this is a sole axiom for identity from which the usual ones can be derived. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 9-May-2005.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑧]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ [𝑥 / 𝑧]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbal1 2558* | Check out sbal 2202 for a version not dependent on ax-13 2402. A theorem used in elimination of disjoint variable restriction on 𝑥 and 𝑧 by replacing it with a distinctor ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑧. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sbal2 2559* | Move quantifier in and out of substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) Remove a distinct variable constraint. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 24-Dec-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2023.) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use sbal 2202 instead. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | 2sb8e 2560* | An equivalent expression for double existence. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. For a version requiring more disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see 2sb8ef 2386. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 2-Nov-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑤[𝑧 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | dfmoeu 2561* | An elementary proof of moeu 2609 in disguise, connecting an expression characterizing uniqueness (df-mo 2565) to that of existential uniqueness (eu6 2600). No particular order of definition is required, as one can be derived from the other. This is shown here and in dfeumo 2562. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦)) ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | dfeumo 2562* | An elementary proof showing the reverse direction of dfmoeu 2561. Here the characterizing expression of existential uniqueness (eu6 2600) is derived from that of uniqueness (df-mo 2565). (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)) ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Syntax | wmo 2563 | Extend wff definition to include the at-most-one quantifier ("there exists at most one 𝑥 such that 𝜑"). |
| wff ∃*𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | mojust 2564* | Soundness justification theorem for df-mo 2565. (Contributed by NM, 11-Mar-2010.) Added this theorem by adapting the proof of eujust 2597. (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ↔ ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Definition | df-mo 2565* |
Define the at-most-one quantifier. The expression ∃*𝑥𝜑 is read
"there exists at most one 𝑥 such that 𝜑". This is also
called
the "uniqueness quantifier" but that expression is also used
for the
unique existential quantifier df-eu 2595, therefore we avoid that
ambiguous name.
Notation of [BellMachover] p. 460, whose definition we show as mo3 2590. For other possible definitions see moeu 2609 and mo4 2592. Note that the definiens does not express "at-most-one" in the empty domain. Since the hypothesis relies on ax-6 1986, this case is excluded anyway. Nevertheless, it was suggested to begin with the definition of uniqueness (eu6 2600) and then define the at-most-one quantifier via moeu 2609. Both eu6 2600 and moeu 2609 remain valid in the empty domain. The hypothesis asserts that the definition is independent of the particular choice of the dummy variable 𝑦. Without this hypothesis, mojust 2564 would be derivable from propositional axioms alone: one could apply the definiens for ∃*𝑥𝜑 twice, using different dummy variables 𝑦 and 𝑧, and then invoke bitr3i 279 to establish their equivalence. This would jeopardize the independence of axioms, as demonstrated in an analoguous situation involving df-ss 3921 to prove ax-8 2143 (see in-ax8 36548). Prefer dfmo 2566 unless you can prove the hypothesis from fewer axioms in special cases. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-May-2019.) Make this the definition (which used to be moeu 2609, while this definition was then proved as dfmo 2566). (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ↔ ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧)) ⇒ ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | dfmo 2566* | Simplify definition df-mo 2565 by removing its provable hypothesis. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 15-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | nexmo 2567 | Nonexistence implies uniqueness. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.) Avoid ax-11 2190. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 16-Oct-2022.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃*𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | exmo 2568 | Any proposition holds for some 𝑥 or holds for at most one 𝑥. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) Shorten proof and avoid df-eu 2595. (Revised by BJ, 14-Oct-2022.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃*𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | moabs 2569 | Absorption of existence condition by uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2002.) Shorten proof and avoid df-eu 2595. (Revised by BJ, 14-Oct-2022.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃*𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | moim 2570 | The at-most-one quantifier reverses implication. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃*𝑥𝜓 → ∃*𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | moimi 2571 | The at-most-one quantifier reverses implication. (Contributed by NM, 15-Feb-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜓 → ∃*𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | moimdv 2572* | The at-most-one quantifier reverses implication, deduction form. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 25-Feb-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜒 → ∃*𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | mobi 2573 | Equivalence theorem for the at-most-one quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Feb-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | mobii 2574 | Formula-building rule for the at-most-one quantifier (inference form). (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 17-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃*𝑥𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | mobidv 2575* | Formula-building rule for the at-most-one quantifier (deduction form). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) Reduce axiom dependencies and shorten proof. (Revised by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃*𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | mobid 2576 | Formula-building rule for the at-most-one quantifier (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) Remove dependency on ax-10 2174, ax-11 2190, ax-13 2402. (Revised by BJ, 14-Oct-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Feb-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃*𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | moa1 2577 | If an implication holds for at most one value, then its consequent holds for at most one value. See also ala1 1832 and exa1 1857. (Contributed by NM, 28-Jul-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 22-Dec-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → ∃*𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | moan 2578 | "At most one" is still the case when a conjunct is added. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 → ∃*𝑥(𝜓 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | moani 2579 | "At most one" is still true when a conjunct is added, inference form. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ ∃*𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ∃*𝑥(𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | moor 2580 | "At most one" is still the case when a disjunct is removed. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ∃*𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | mooran1 2581 | "At most one" imports disjunction to conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((∃*𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃*𝑥𝜓) → ∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | mooran2 2582 | "At most one" exports disjunction to conjunction. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | nfmo1 2583 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the at-most-one quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) Adapt to new definition. (Revised by BJ, 1-Oct-2022.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃*𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | nfmod2 2584 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the at-most-one quantifier. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. See nfmodv 2585 for a version replacing the distinctor with a disjoint variable condition, not requiring ax-13 2402. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Nov-2016.) Avoid df-eu 2595. (Revised by BJ, 14-Oct-2022.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | nfmodv 2585* | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the at-most-one quantifier. See nfmod 2587 for a version without disjoint variable conditions but requiring ax-13 2402. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Nov-2016.) (Revised by BJ, 28-Jan-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | nfmov 2586* | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the at-most-one quantifier. See nfmo 2588 for a version without disjoint variable conditions but requiring ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | nfmod 2587 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the at-most-one quantifier. Deduction version of nfmo 2588. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use the weaker nfmodv 2585 when possible. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Nov-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | nfmo 2588 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the at-most-one quantifier. Note that 𝑥 and 𝑦 need not be disjoint. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use the weaker nfmov 2586 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | mof 2589* | Version of df-mo 2565 with disjoint variable condition replaced by nonfreeness hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) Extract dfmo 2566 from this proof, and prove mof 2589 from it (as of 30-Sep-2022, directly from df-mo 2565). (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 28-May-2019.) Avoid ax-13 2402. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 16-Oct-2022.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | mo3 2590* | Alternate definition of the at-most-one quantifier. Definition of [BellMachover] p. 460, except that definition has the side condition that 𝑦 not occur in 𝜑 in place of our hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.) Remove dependency on ax-13 2402. (Revised by BJ and WL, 29-Jan-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | mo 2591* | Equivalent definitions of "there exists at most one". (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Dec-2018.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | mo4 2592* |
At-most-one quantifier expressed using implicit substitution. This
theorem is also a direct consequence of mo4f 2593,
but this proof is based
on fewer axioms.
By the way, swapping 𝑥, 𝑦 and 𝜑, 𝜓 leads to an expression for ∃*𝑦𝜓, which is equivalent to ∃*𝑥𝜑 (is a proof line), so the right hand side is a rare instance of an expression where swapping the quantifiers can be done without ax-11 2190. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jul-1995.) Reduce axiom usage. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 18-Oct-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | mo4f 2593* | At-most-one quantifier expressed using implicit substitution. Note that the disjoint variable condition on 𝑦, 𝜑 can be replaced by the nonfreeness hypothesis ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 with essentially the same proof. (Contributed by NM, 10-Apr-2004.) Remove dependency on ax-13 2402. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 19-Jan-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Syntax | weu 2594 | Extend wff definition to include the unique existential quantifier ("there exists a unique 𝑥 such that 𝜑"). |
| wff ∃!𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Definition | df-eu 2595 |
Define the existential uniqueness quantifier. This expresses unique
existence, or existential uniqueness, which is the conjunction of
existence (df-ex 1799) and uniqueness (df-mo 2565). The expression
∃!𝑥𝜑 is read "there exists exactly
one 𝑥 such that 𝜑 " or
"there exists a unique 𝑥 such that 𝜑". This is also
called the
"uniqueness quantifier" but that expression is also used for the
at-most-one quantifier df-mo 2565, therefore we avoid that ambiguous name.
Definition 10.1 of [BellMachover] p. 97; also Definition *14.02 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 175. Other possible definitions are given by eu1 2636, eu2 2635, eu3v 2596, and eu6 2600. As for double unique existence, beware that the expression ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 means "there exists a unique 𝑥 such that there exists a unique 𝑦 such that 𝜑 " which is a weaker property than "there exists exactly one 𝑥 and one 𝑦 such that 𝜑 " (see 2eu4 2680). (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) Make this the definition (which used to be eu6 2600, while this definition was then proved as dfeu 2621). (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | eu3v 2596* | An alternate way to express existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jul-1994.) Replace a nonfreeness hypothesis with a disjoint variable condition on 𝜑, 𝑦 to reduce axiom usage. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | eujust 2597* | Soundness justification theorem for eu6 2600 when this was the definition of the unique existential quantifier (note that 𝑦 and 𝑧 need not be disjoint, although the weaker theorem with that disjoint variable condition added would be enough to justify the soundness of the definition). See eujustALT 2598 for a proof that provides an example of how it can be achieved through the use of dvelim 2481. (Contributed by NM, 11-Mar-2010.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦) ↔ ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | eujustALT 2598* | Alternate proof of eujust 2597 illustrating the use of dvelim 2481. (Contributed by NM, 11-Mar-2010.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦) ↔ ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | eu6lem 2599* | Lemma of eu6im 2601. A dissection of an idiom characterizing existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) This used to be the definition of the unique existential quantifier, while df-eu 2595 was then proved as dfeu 2621. (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Jan-2023.) Extract common proof lines. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 3-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦) ↔ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∧ ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧))) | ||
| Theorem | eu6 2600* | Alternate definition of the unique existential quantifier df-eu 2595 not using the at-most-one quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) This used to be the definition of the unique existential quantifier, while df-eu 2595 was then proved as dfeu 2621. (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Jan-2023.) Remove use of ax-11 2190. (Revised by SN, 21-Sep-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦)) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |