P. 27 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 2601-2700   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	eujust 2601*	Soundness justification theorem for eu6 2604 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 2602 for a proof that provides an example of how it can be achieved through the use of dvelim 2485. (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 2602*	Alternate proof of eujust 2601 illustrating the use of dvelim 2485. (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 2603*	Lemma of eu6im 2605. 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 2599 was then proved as dfeu 2625. (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 2604*	Alternate definition of the unique existential quantifier df-eu 2599 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 2599 was then proved as dfeu 2625. (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Jan-2023.) Remove use of ax-11 2194. (Revised by SN, 21-Sep-2023.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
Theorem	eu6im 2605*	One direction of eu6 2604 needs fewer axioms. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 2-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → ∃!𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	euf 2606*	Version of eu6 2604 with disjoint variable condition replaced by nonfreeness hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 30-Oct-2018.) Avoid ax-13 2406. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 16-Oct-2022.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
Theorem	euex 2607	Existential uniqueness implies existence. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2018.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	eumo 2608	Existential uniqueness implies uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 → ∃*𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	eumoi 2609	Uniqueness inferred from existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1995.)
⊢ ∃!𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃*𝑥𝜑
Theorem	exmoeub 2610	Existence implies that uniqueness is equivalent to unique existence. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	exmoeu 2611	Existence is equivalent to uniqueness implying existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Dec-2018.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃*𝑥𝜑 → ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	moeuex 2612	Uniqueness implies that existence is equivalent to unique existence. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	moeu 2613	Uniqueness is equivalent to existence implying unique existence. Alternate definition of the at-most-one quantifier, in terms of the existential quantifier and the unique existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) This used to be the definition of the at-most-one quantifier, while df-mo 2569 was then proved as dfmo2 2626. (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	eubi 2614	Equivalence theorem for the unique existential quantifier. Theorem *14.271 in [WhiteheadRussell] p. 192. (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 11-Jul-2011.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	eubii 2615	Introduce unique existential quantifier to both sides of an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	eubidv 2616*	Formula-building rule for unique existential quantifier (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-1994.) Reduce axiom dependencies and shorten proof. (Revised by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	eubid 2617	Formula-building rule for the unique existential quantifier (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Feb-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	nfeu1ALT 2618	Alternate version of nfeu1 2619 with a shorter proof but using ax-12 2215. Bound-variable hypothesis builder for uniqueness. See also nfeu1 2619. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑥𝜑
Theorem	nfeu1 2619	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for uniqueness. See nfeu1ALT 2618 for a shorter proof using ax-12 2215. This proof illustrates the systematic way of proving nonfreeness in a defined expression: consider the definiens as a tree whose nodes are its subformulas, and prove by tree-induction the nonfreeness of each node, starting from the leaves (generally using nfv 1937 or nf* theorems for previously defined expressions) and up to the root. Here, the definiens is a conjunction of two previously defined expressions, which automatically yields the present proof. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Revised by BJ, 2-Oct-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑥𝜑
Theorem	nfeud2 2620	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for uniqueness. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Nov-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Oct-2018.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 14-Oct-2022.) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use nfeudw 2621 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	nfeudw 2621*	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the unique existential quantifier. Deduction version of nfeu 2624. Version of nfeud 2622 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 15-Feb-2013.) Avoid ax-13 2406. (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	nfeud 2622	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the unique existential quantifier. Deduction version of nfeu 2624. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker nfeudw 2621 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 15-Feb-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	nfeuw 2623*	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the unique existential quantifier. Version of nfeu 2624 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) Avoid ax-13 2406. (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑
Theorem	nfeu 2624	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the unique existential quantifier. Note that 𝑥 and 𝑦 need not be disjoint. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker nfeuw 2623 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑
Theorem	dfeu 2625	Rederive df-eu 2599 from the old definition eu6 2604. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-May-2019.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) Use df-eu 2599 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	dfmo2 2626*	Rederive df-mo 2569 from the old definition moeu 2613. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) Use dfmo 2570 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))
Theorem	euequ 2627*	There exists a unique set equal to a given set. Special case of eueqi 3675 proved using only predicate calculus. The proof needs 𝑦 = 𝑧 be free of 𝑥. This is ensured by having 𝑥 and 𝑦 be distinct. Alternately, a distinctor ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 could have been used instead. See eueq 3674 and eueqi 3675 for classes. (Contributed by Stefan Allan, 4-Dec-2008.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 8-Sep-2019.) Reduce axiom usage. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 1-Mar-2023.)
⊢ ∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	sb8eulem 2628*	Lemma. Factor out the common proof skeleton of sb8euv 2629 and sb8eu 2630. Variable substitution in unique existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Aug-2019.) Factor out common proof lines. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 9-Feb-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦[𝑤 / 𝑥]𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sb8euv 2629*	Variable substitution in unique existential quantifier. Version of sb8eu 2630 requiring more disjoint variables, but fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 7-Feb-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sb8eu 2630	Variable substitution in unique existential quantifier. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. For a version requiring more disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see sb8euv 2629. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Aug-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sb8mo 2631	Variable substitution for the at-most-one quantifier. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	cbvmovw 2632*	Change bound variable. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. See cbvmo 2634 and cbvmow 2633 for versions with fewer disjoint variable conditions but requiring more axioms. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (Revised by GG, 30-Sep-2024.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbvmow 2633*	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Version of cbvmo 2634 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-10 2178, ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (Revised by GG, 23-May-2024.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbvmo 2634	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker cbvmow 2633, cbvmovw 2632 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (Revised by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jan-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbveuvw 2635*	Change bound variable. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. See cbveu 2637 for a version with fewer disjoint variable conditions but requiring more axioms. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-1994.) (Revised by GG, 30-Sep-2024.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbveuw 2636*	Version of cbveu 2637 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-10 2178, ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-1994.) (Revised by GG, 23-May-2024.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbveu 2637	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker cbveuw 2636, cbveuvw 2635 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbveuALT 2638	Alternative proof of cbveu 2637. Since df-eu 2599 combines two other quantifiers, one can base this theorem on their associated 'change bounded variable' kind of theorems as well. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jan-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	eu2 2639*	An alternate way of defining existential uniqueness. Definition 6.10 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 26. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jul-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Dec-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	eu1 2640*	An alternate way to express uniqueness used by some authors. Exercise 2(b) of [Margaris] p. 110. (Contributed by NM, 20-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 29-Oct-2018.) Avoid ax-13 2406. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 7-Feb-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	euor 2641	Introduce a disjunct into a unique existential quantifier. For a version requiring disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see euorv 2642. (Contributed by NM, 21-Oct-2005.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥𝜓) → ∃!𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	euorv 2642*	Introduce a disjunct into a unique existential quantifier. Version of euor 2641 requiring disjoint variables, but fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 14-Jan-2023.)
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥𝜓) → ∃!𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	euor2 2643	Introduce or eliminate a disjunct in a unique existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 21-Oct-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Dec-2018.)
⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥𝜑 → (∃!𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	sbmo 2644*	Substitution into an at-most-one quantifier. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 2-Sep-2009.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∃*𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	eu4 2645*	Uniqueness using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jul-1995.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	euimmo 2646	Existential uniqueness implies uniqueness through reverse implication. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1995.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃!𝑥𝜓 → ∃*𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	euim 2647	Add unique existential quantifiers to an implication. Note the reversed implication in the antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 19-Oct-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 14-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 1-Oct-2023.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)) → (∃!𝑥𝜓 → ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	moanimlem 2648	Factor out the common proof skeleton of moanimv 2649 and moanim 2650. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Dec-2018.) Factor out common proof lines. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 8-Feb-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)))    &   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	moanimv 2649*	Introduction of a conjunct into an at-most-one quantifier. Version of moanim 2650 requiring disjoint variables, but fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) Reduce axiom usage . (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 8-Feb-2023.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	moanim 2650	Introduction of a conjunct into "at most one" quantifier. For a version requiring disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see moanimv 2649. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Dec-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	euan 2651	Introduction of a conjunct into unique existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Dec-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	moanmo 2652	Nested at-most-one quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jan-2006.)
⊢ ∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	moaneu 2653	Nested at-most-one and unique existential quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jan-2006.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Dec-2018.)
⊢ ∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	euanv 2654*	Introduction of a conjunct into unique existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 14-Jan-2023.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	mopick 2655	"At most one" picks a variable value, eliminating an existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 27-Jan-1997.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 17-Sep-2019.)
⊢ ((∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) → (𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	moexexlem 2656	Factor out the proof skeleton of moexex 2668 and moexexvw 2658. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦∃*𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃*𝑦∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) → ∃*𝑦∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	2moexv 2657*	Double quantification with "at most one". (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∃*𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	moexexvw 2658*	"At most one" double quantification. Version of moexexv 2669 with an additional disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jan-1997.) (Revised by GG, 22-Aug-2023.) Factor out common proof lines with moexex 2668. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2023.)
⊢ ((∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) → ∃*𝑦∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	2moswapv 2659*	A condition allowing to swap an existential quantifier and at at-most-one quantifier. Version of 2moswap 2674 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 10-Apr-2004.) (Revised by GG, 22-Aug-2023.) Factor out common proof lines with moexexvw 2658. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃*𝑦∃𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	2euswapv 2660*	A condition allowing to swap an existential quantifier and a unique existential quantifier. Version of 2euswap 2675 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 10-Apr-2004.) (Revised by GG, 22-Aug-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	2euexv 2661*	Double quantification with existential uniqueness. Version of 2euex 2671 with 𝑥 and 𝑦 distinct, but not requiring ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2023.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑦∃!𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	2exeuv 2662*	Double existential uniqueness implies double unique existential quantification. Version of 2exeu 2676 with 𝑥 and 𝑦 distinct, but not requiring ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2023.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑) → ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	eupick 2663	Existential uniqueness "picks" a variable value for which another wff is true. If there is only one thing 𝑥 such that 𝜑 is true, and there is also an 𝑥 (actually the same one) such that 𝜑 and 𝜓 are both true, then 𝜑 implies 𝜓 regardless of 𝑥. This theorem can be useful for eliminating existential quantifiers in a hypothesis. Compare Theorem *14.26 in [WhiteheadRussell] p. 192. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jul-1994.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) → (𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	eupicka 2664	Version of eupick 2663 with closed formulas. (Contributed by NM, 6-Sep-2008.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	eupickb 2665	Existential uniqueness "pick" showing wff equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Dec-2018.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	eupickbi 2666	Theorem *14.26 in [WhiteheadRussell] p. 192. (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 11-Jul-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Dec-2018.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 → (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	mopick2 2667	"At most one" can show the existence of a common value. In this case we can infer existence of conjunction from a conjunction of existence, and it is one way to achieve the converse of 19.40 1909. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.)
⊢ ((∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) → ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))
Theorem	moexex 2668	"At most one" double quantification. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the version moexexvw 2658 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 28-Dec-2018.) Factor out common proof lines with moexexvw 2658. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ((∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) → ∃*𝑦∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	moexexv 2669*	"At most one" double quantification. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker moexexvw 2658 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jan-1997.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) → ∃*𝑦∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	2moex 2670	Double quantification with "at most one". Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker 2moexv 2657 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∃*𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	2euex 2671	Double quantification with existential uniqueness. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker 2euexv 2661 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑦∃!𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	2eumo 2672	Nested unique existential quantifier and at-most-one quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → ∃*𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	2eu2ex 2673	Double existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	2moswap 2674	A condition allowing to swap an existential quantifier and at at-most-one quantifier. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker 2moswapv 2659 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 10-Apr-2004.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃*𝑦∃𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	2euswap 2675	A condition allowing to swap an existential quantifier and a unique existential quantifier. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker 2euswapv 2660 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 10-Apr-2004.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	2exeu 2676	Double existential uniqueness implies double unique existential quantification. The converse does not hold. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker 2exeuv 2662 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 22-Dec-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑) → ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	2mo2 2677*	Two ways of expressing "there exists at most one ordered pair ⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ such that 𝜑(𝑥, 𝑦) holds. Note that this is not equivalent to ∃*𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑. See also 2mo 2678. This is the analogue of 2eu4 2684 for existential uniqueness. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Oct-2019.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 3-Jan-2023.)
⊢ ((∃*𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑦∃𝑥𝜑) ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑤∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤)))
Theorem	2mo 2678*	Two ways of expressing "there exists at most one ordered pair ⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ such that 𝜑(𝑥, 𝑦) holds. See also 2mo2 2677. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2005.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 17-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Nov-2019.)
⊢ (∃𝑧∃𝑤∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤)) ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧∀𝑤((𝜑 ∧ [𝑧 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑦]𝜑) → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤)))
Theorem	2mos 2679*	Double "there exists at most one", using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 10-Feb-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-May-2025.)
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑧∃𝑤∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤)) ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧∀𝑤((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤)))
Theorem	2eu1 2680	Double existential uniqueness. This theorem shows a condition under which a "naive" definition matches the correct one. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. Use the weaker 2eu1v 2681 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Apr-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ↔ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑)))
Theorem	2eu1v 2681*	Double existential uniqueness. This theorem shows a condition under which a "naive" definition matches the correct one. Version of 2eu1 2680 with 𝑥 and 𝑦 distinct, but not requiring ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ↔ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑)))
Theorem	2eu2 2682	Double existential uniqueness. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑 → (∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	2eu3 2683	Double existential uniqueness. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Apr-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(∃*𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃*𝑦𝜑) → ((∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃!𝑥𝜑) ↔ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑)))
Theorem	2eu4 2684*	This theorem provides us with a definition of double existential uniqueness ("exactly one 𝑥 and exactly one 𝑦"). Naively one might think (incorrectly) that it could be defined by ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑. See 2eu1 2680 for a condition under which the naive definition holds and 2exeu 2676 for a one-way implication. See 2eu5 2685 and 2eu8 2688 for alternate definitions. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Sep-2019.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑧∃𝑤∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤))))
Theorem	2eu5 2685*	An alternate definition of double existential uniqueness (see 2eu4 2684). A mistake sometimes made in the literature is to use ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦 to mean "exactly one 𝑥 and exactly one 𝑦". (For example, see Proposition 7.53 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 53.) It turns out that this is actually a weaker assertion, as can be seen by expanding out the formal definitions. This theorem shows that the erroneous definition can be repaired by conjoining ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 as an additional condition. The correct definition apparently has never been published. (∃* means "there exists at most one".) (Contributed by NM, 26-Oct-2003.) Avoid ax-13 2406. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2023.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑧∃𝑤∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤))))
Theorem	2eu6 2686*	Two equivalent expressions for double existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2005.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 17-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 2-Oct-2019.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑) ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑤∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤)))
Theorem	2eu7 2687	Two equivalent expressions for double existential uniqueness. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-2005.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑) ↔ ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦(∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	2eu8 2688	Two equivalent expressions for double existential uniqueness. Curiously, we can put ∃! on either of the internal conjuncts but not both. We can also commute ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦 using 2eu7 2687. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2406. (Contributed by NM, 20-Feb-2005.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥∃!𝑦(∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜑) ↔ ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦(∃!𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	euae 2689*	Two ways to express "exactly one thing exists". To paraphrase the statement and explain the label: there Exists a Unique thing if and only if for All 𝑥, 𝑥 Equals some given (and disjoint) 𝑦. Both sides are false in set theory, see Theorems neutru 36780 and dtru 5409. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) State the theorem using truth constant ⊤. (Revised by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.) Reduce axiom dependencies. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	exists1 2690*	Two ways to express "exactly one thing exists". The left-hand side requires only one variable to express this. Both sides are false in set theory, see Theorem dtru 5409. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	exists2 2691	A condition implying that at least two things exist. (Contributed by NM, 10-Apr-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) Reduce axiom usage. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 4-Mar-2023.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝜑) → ¬ ∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥)
1.7  Other axiomatizations related to classical predicate calculus
1.7.1  Aristotelian logic: Assertic syllogisms Model the Aristotelian assertic syllogisms using modern notation. This section shows that the Aristotelian assertic syllogisms can be proven with our axioms of logic, and also provides generally useful theorems. In antiquity Aristotelian logic and Stoic logic (see mptnan 1791) were the leading logical systems. Aristotelian logic became the leading system in medieval Europe. This section models this system (including later refinements). Aristotle defined syllogisms very generally ("a discourse in which certain (specific) things having been supposed, something different from the things supposed results of necessity because these things are so") Aristotle, Prior Analytics 24b18-20. However, in Prior Analytics he limits himself to categorical syllogisms that consist of three categorical propositions with specific structures. The syllogisms are the valid subset of the possible combinations of these structures. The medieval schools used vowels to identify the types of terms (a=all, e=none, i=some, and o=some are not), and named the different syllogisms with Latin words that had the vowels in the intended order. "There is a surprising amount of scholarly debate about how best to formalize Aristotle's syllogisms..." according to Aristotle's Modal Proofs: Prior Analytics A8-22 in Predicate Logic, Adriane Rini, Springer, 2011, ISBN 978-94-007-0049-9, page 28. For example, Lukasiewicz believes it is important to note that "Aristotle does not introduce singular terms or premisses into his system". Lukasiewicz also believes that Aristotelian syllogisms are predicates (having a true/false value), not inference rules: "The characteristic sign of an inference is the word 'therefore'... no syllogism is formulated by Aristotle primarily as an inference, but they are all implications." Jan Lukasiewicz, Aristotle's Syllogistic from the Standpoint of Modern Formal Logic, Second edition, Oxford, 1957, page 1-2. Lukasiewicz devised a specialized prefix notation for representing Aristotelian syllogisms instead of using standard predicate logic notation. We instead translate each Aristotelian syllogism into an inference rule, and each rule is defined using standard predicate logic notation and predicates. The predicates are represented by wff variables that may depend on the quantified variable 𝑥. Our translation is essentially identical to the one used in Rini page 18, Table 2 "Non-Modal Syllogisms in Lower Predicate Calculus (LPC)", which uses standard predicate logic with predicates. Rini states, "the crucial point is that we capture the meaning Aristotle intends, and the method by which we represent that meaning is less important". There are two differences: we make the existence criteria explicit, and we use 𝜑, 𝜓, and 𝜒 in the order they appear (a common Metamath convention). Patzig also uses standard predicate logic notation and predicates (though he interprets them as conditional propositions, not as inference rules); see Gunther Patzig, Aristotle's Theory of the Syllogism second edition, 1963, English translation by Jonathan Barnes, 1968, page 38. Terms such as "all" and "some" are translated into predicate logic using the approach devised by Frege and Russell. "Frege (and Russell) devised an ingenious procedure for regimenting binary quantifiers like "every" and "some" in terms of unary quantifiers like "everything" and "something": they formalized sentences of the form "Some A is B" and "Every A is B" as exists x (Ax and Bx) and all x (Ax implies Bx), respectively." "Quantifiers and Quantification", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/quantification/ 1791. See Principia Mathematica page 22 and *10 for more information (especially *10.3 and *10.26). Expressions of the form "no 𝜑 is 𝜓 " are consistently translated as ∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓). These can also be expressed as ¬ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓), per alinexa 1866. We translate "all 𝜑 is 𝜓 " to ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓), "some 𝜑 is 𝜓 " to ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓), and "some 𝜑 is not 𝜓 " to ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓). It is traditional to use the singular form "is", not the plural form "are", in the generic expressions. By convention the major premise is listed first. In traditional Aristotelian syllogisms the predicates have a restricted form ("x is a ..."); those predicates could be modeled in modern notation by more specific constructs such as 𝑥 = 𝐴, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, or 𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴. Here we use wff variables instead of specialized restricted forms. This generalization makes the syllogisms more useful in more circumstances. In addition, these expressions make it clearer that the syllogisms of Aristotelian logic are the forerunners of predicate calculus. If we used restricted forms like 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 instead, we would not only unnecessarily limit their use, but we would also need to use set and class axioms, making their relationship to predicate calculus less clear. Using such specific constructs would also be anti-historical; Aristotle and others who directly followed his work focused on relating wholes to their parts, an approach now called part-whole theory. The work of Cantor and Peano (over 2,000 years later) led to a sharper distinction between inclusion (⊆) and membership (∈); this distinction was not directly made in Aristotle's work. There are some widespread misconceptions about the existential assumptions made by Aristotle (aka "existential import"). Aristotle was not trying to develop something exactly corresponding to modern logic. Aristotle devised "a companion-logic for science. He relegates fictions like fairy godmothers and mermaids and unicorns to the realms of poetry and literature. In his mind, they exist outside the ambit of science. This is why he leaves no room for such nonexistent entities in his logic. This is a thoughtful choice, not an inadvertent omission. Technically, Aristotelian science is a search for definitions, where a definition is "a phrase signifying a thing's essence." (Topics, I.5.102a37, Pickard-Cambridge.)... Because non-existent entities cannot be anything, they do not, in Aristotle's mind, possess an essence... This is why he leaves no place for fictional entities like goat-stags (or unicorns)." Source: Louis F. Groarke, "Aristotle: Logic", section 7. (Existential Assumptions), Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (A Peer-Reviewed Academic Resource), http://www.iep.utm.edu/aris-log/ 1866. Thus, some syllogisms have "extra" existence hypotheses that do not directly appear in Aristotle's original materials (since they were always assumed); they are added where they are needed. This affects barbari 2698, celaront 2700, cesaro 2707, camestros 2708, felapton 2715, darapti 2713, calemos 2719, fesapo 2720, and bamalip 2721. These are only the assertic syllogisms. Aristotle also defined modal syllogisms that deal with modal qualifiers such as "necessarily" and "possibly". Historically, Aristotelian modal syllogisms were not as widely used. For more about modal syllogisms in a modern context, see Rini as well as Aristotle's Modal Syllogistic by Marko Malink, Harvard University Press, November 2013. We do not treat them further here. Aristotelian logic is essentially the forerunner of predicate calculus (as well as set theory since it discusses membership in groups), while Stoic logic is essentially the forerunner of propositional calculus. The following twenty-four syllogisms (from barbara 2692 to bamalip 2721) are all proven from { ax-mp 5, ax-1 6, ax-2 7, ax-3 8, ax-gen 1818, ax-4 1832 }, which corresponds in the usual translation to modal logic (a universal (resp. existential) quantifier maps to necessity (resp. possibility)) to the weakest normal modal logic (K). Some proofs could be shortened by using additionally spi 2222 (inference form of sp 2221, which corresponds to the axiom (T) of modal logic), as demonstrated by dariiALT 2695, barbariALT 2699, festinoALT 2704, barocoALT 2706, daraptiALT 2714.
Theorem	barbara 2692	"Barbara", one of the fundamental syllogisms of Aristotelian logic. All 𝜑 is 𝜓, and all 𝜒 is 𝜑, therefore all 𝜒 is 𝜓. In Aristotelian notation, AAA-1: MaP and SaM therefore SaP. For example, given "All men are mortal" and "Socrates is a man", we can prove "Socrates is mortal". If H is the set of men, M is the set of mortal beings, and S is Socrates, these word phrases can be represented as ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐻 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑀) (all men are mortal) and ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑆 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐻) (Socrates is a man) therefore ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑆 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑀) (Socrates is mortal). Russell and Whitehead note that "the syllogism in Barbara [barbara 2692] is derived from [syl 18]" (quote after Theorem *2.06 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101). Most of the proof is in alsyl 1916. There are a legion of sources for Barbara, including http://www.friesian.com/aristotl.htm 1916, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-logic/ 1916, and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism 1916. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 24-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜓)
Theorem	celarent 2693	"Celarent", one of the syllogisms of Aristotelian logic. No 𝜑 is 𝜓, and all 𝜒 is 𝜑, therefore no 𝜒 is 𝜓. Instance of barbara 2692. In Aristotelian notation, EAE-1: MeP and SaM therefore SeP. For example, given the "No reptiles have fur" and "All snakes are reptiles", therefore "No snakes have fur". Example from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism 2692. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 24-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	darii 2694	"Darii", one of the syllogisms of Aristotelian logic. All 𝜑 is 𝜓, and some 𝜒 is 𝜑, therefore some 𝜒 is 𝜓. In Aristotelian notation, AII-1: MaP and SiM therefore SiP. For example, given "All rabbits have fur" and "Some pets are rabbits", therefore "Some pets have fur". Example from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism. See dariiALT 2695 for a shorter proof requiring more axioms. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 24-Aug-2016.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by BJ, 16-Sep-2022.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	dariiALT 2695	Alternate proof of darii 2694, shorter but using more axioms. This shows how the use of spi 2222 may shorten some proofs of the Aristotelian syllogisms, even though this adds axiom dependencies. Note that spi 2222 is the inference associated with sp 2221, which corresponds to the axiom (T) of modal logic. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 27-Aug-2016.) Added precisions on axiom usage. (Revised by BJ, 27-Sep-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	ferio 2696	"Ferio" ("Ferioque"), one of the syllogisms of Aristotelian logic. No 𝜑 is 𝜓, and some 𝜒 is 𝜑, therefore some 𝜒 is not 𝜓. Instance of darii 2694. In Aristotelian notation, EIO-1: MeP and SiM therefore SoP. For example, given "No homework is fun" and "Some reading is homework", therefore "Some reading is not fun". This is essentially a logical axiom in Aristotelian logic. Example from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism 2694. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 24-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	barbarilem 2697	Lemma for barbari 2698 and the other Aristotelian syllogisms with existential assumption. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Sep-2022.)
⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	barbari 2698	"Barbari", one of the syllogisms of Aristotelian logic. All 𝜑 is 𝜓, all 𝜒 is 𝜑, and some 𝜒 exist, therefore some 𝜒 is 𝜓. In Aristotelian notation, AAI-1: MaP and SaM therefore SiP. For example, given "All men are mortal", "All Greeks are men", and "Greeks exist", therefore "Some Greeks are mortal". Note the existence hypothesis (to prove the "some" in the conclusion). Example from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 27-Aug-2016.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by BJ, 16-Sep-2022.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	barbariALT 2699	Alternate proof of barbari 2698, shorter but using more axioms. See comment of dariiALT 2695. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 27-Aug-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	celaront 2700	"Celaront", one of the syllogisms of Aristotelian logic. No 𝜑 is 𝜓, all 𝜒 is 𝜑, and some 𝜒 exist, therefore some 𝜒 is not 𝜓. Instance of barbari 2698. In Aristotelian notation, EAO-1: MeP and SaM therefore SoP. For example, given "No reptiles have fur", "All snakes are reptiles", and "Snakes exist", prove "Some snakes have no fur". Note the existence hypothesis. Example from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism 2698. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 27-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)