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	exmoeu 2601	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 2602	Uniqueness implies that existence is equivalent to unique existence. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	moeu 2603	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 2551 was then proved as dfmo 2615. (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2022.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	eubi 2604	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 2605	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 2606*	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 2607	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	eubidOLD 2608	Obsolete version of eubid 2607 as of 19-Feb-2023. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-1994.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	nfeu1 2609	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for uniqueness. See also nfeu1ALT 2610. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑥𝜑
Theorem	nfeu1ALT 2610	Alternate proof of nfeu1 2609. This 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 nonfreeness of each node, starting from the leaves (generally using nfv 1957 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 BJ, 2-Oct-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑥𝜑
Theorem	nfeud2 2611	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.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	nfeud 2612	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the unique existential quantifier. Deduction version of nfeu 2613. (Contributed by NM, 15-Feb-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	nfeu 2613	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the unique existential quantifier. Note that 𝑥 and 𝑦 need not be disjoint. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑
Theorem	dfeu 2614	Rederive df-eu 2587 from the old definition eu6 2592. (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 2587 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	dfmo 2615*	Rederive df-mo 2551 from the old definition moeu 2603. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) Use df-mo 2551 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))
Theorem	euequ 2616*	There exists a unique set equal to a given set. Special case of eueqi 3591 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 3589 and eueqi 3591 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	euequOLD 2617*	Obsolete proof of euequ 2616 as of 28-Feb-2023. (Contributed by Stefan Allan, 4-Dec-2008.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 8-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	moeuOLD 2618	Obsolete proof of moeu 2603 as of 14-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	exmoOLD 2619	Obsolete proof of exmo 2554 as of 14-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃*𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	eubidvOLD 2620*	Obsolete proof of eubidv 2606 as of 1-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-1994.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	mobidvOLDOLD 2621*	Obsolete proof of mobidv 2564 as of 1-Oct-2022. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃*𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	nfmo1OLD 2622	Obsolete proof of nfmo1 2573 as of 1-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∃*𝑥𝜑
Theorem	nfeud2OLD 2623	Obsolete proof of nfeud2 2611 as of 14-Oct-2022. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Nov-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Oct-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	nfmod2OLD 2624	Obsolete proof of nfmod2 2574 as of 14-Oct-2022. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Nov-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	eubidvOLDOLD 2625*	Obsolete version of eubidv 2606 as of 26-Sep-2022. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-1994.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	mobidvOLD 2626*	Obsolete version of mobidv 2564 as of 7-Oct-2022. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃*𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	eubidOLDOLD 2627	Obsolete proof of eubid 2607 as of 14-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	mobidOLDOLD 2628	Obsolete proof of mobid 2565 as of 14-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃*𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	euexOLD 2629	Obsolete proof of euex 2597 as of 7-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	dfeuOLD 2630	Obsolete proof of dfeu 2614 as of 7-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	moabsOLD 2631	Obsolete proof of moabs 2555 as of 14-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2002.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃*𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	exmoeuOLD 2632	Obsolete proof of exmoeu 2601 as of 7-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Dec-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃*𝑥𝜑 → ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	sb8eulem 2633*	Lemma. Factor out the common proof skeleton of sb8euv 2634 and sb8eu 2635. 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    &   ⊢ (𝑤 = 𝑦 → ([𝑤 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sb8euv 2634*	Variable substitution in unique existential quantifier. Version of sb8eu 2635 requiring more disjoint variables, but fewer axioms. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 7-Feb-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sb8eu 2635	Variable substitution in unique existential quantifier. For a version requiring more disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see sb8euv 2634. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Aug-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sb8mo 2636	Variable substitution for the at-most-one quantifier. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	cbvmo 2637	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (Revised by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jan-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbveu 2638	Rule used to change bound variables, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 25-Nov-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	cbveuALT 2639	Alternative proof of cbveu 2638. Since df-eu 2587 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	cbvmoOLD 2640	Obsolete version of cbvmo 2637 as of 4-Jan-2023. (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) (Revised by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	eu2 2641*	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 2642*	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 2334. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 7-Feb-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	eu1OLD 2643*	Obsolete version of eu1 2642 as of 7-Feb-2023. (Contributed by NM, 20-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 29-Oct-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	euexALTOLD 2644	Obsolete proof of euex 2597 as of 7-Oct-2022. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	euor 2645	Introduce a disjunct into a unique existential quantifier. For a version requiring disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see euorv 2646. (Contributed by NM, 21-Oct-2005.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥𝜓) → ∃!𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	euorv 2646*	Introduce a disjunct into a unique existential quantifier. Version of euor 2645 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	euorvOLD 2647*	Obsolete version of euorv 2646 as of 14-Jan-2023. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥𝜓) → ∃!𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	euor2 2648	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 2649*	Substitution into an at-most-one quantifier. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 2-Sep-2009.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∃*𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	eu4 2650*	Uniqueness using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jul-1995.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	euimmo 2651	Existential uniqueness implies uniqueness through reverse implication. (Contributed by NM, 22-Apr-1995.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃!𝑥𝜓 → ∃*𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	euim 2652	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.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)) → (∃!𝑥𝜓 → ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	moanimlem 2653	Factor out the common proof skeleton of moanimv 2654 and moanim 2655. (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 2654*	Introduction of a conjunct into an at-most-one quantifier. Version of moanim 2655 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 2655	Introduction of a conjunct into "at most one" quantifier. For a version requiring disjoint variables, but fewer axioms, see moanimv 2654. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Dec-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	euan 2656	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	moanimvOLD 2657*	Obsolete version of moanimv 2654 as of 8-Feb-2023. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	moanmo 2658	Nested at-most-one quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jan-2006.)
⊢ ∃*𝑥(𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	moaneu 2659	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 2660*	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	euanvOLD 2661*	Obsolete version of euanv 2660 as of 14-Jan-2023. (Contributed by NM, 23-Mar-1995.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	mopick 2662	"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	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 1915. (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. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 28-Dec-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ((∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) → ∃*𝑦∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	moexexv 2669*	"At most one" double quantification. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jan-1997.)
⊢ ((∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) → ∃*𝑦∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))
Theorem	2moex 2670	Double quantification with "at most one". (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∃*𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	2euex 2671	Double quantification with existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.)
⊢ (∃!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. (Contributed by NM, 10-Apr-2004.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃*𝑦∃𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	2euswap 2675	A condition allowing to swap an existential quanfitier and a unique existential quantifier. (Contributed by NM, 10-Apr-2004.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	2exeu 2676	Double existential uniqueness implies double unique existential quantification. The converse does not hold. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 22-Dec-2016.)
⊢ ((∃!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 2685 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 "exists at most one", using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 10-Feb-2005.)
⊢ ((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. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Apr-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ↔ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑)))
Theorem	2eu1OLD 2681	Obsolete version of 2eu1 2680 as of 23-Apr-2023. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 11-Nov-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ↔ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑)))
Theorem	2eu2 2682	Double existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.)
⊢ (∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑 → (∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	2eu3 2683	Double existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Apr-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(∃*𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃*𝑦𝜑) → ((∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃!𝑥𝜑) ↔ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑)))
Theorem	2eu3OLD 2684	Obsolete version of 2eu3 2683 as of 23-Apr-2023. (Contributed by NM, 3-Dec-2001.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(∃*𝑥𝜑 ∨ ∃*𝑦𝜑) → ((∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃!𝑥𝜑) ↔ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑)))
Theorem	2eu4 2685*	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 2686 and 2eu8 2689 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 2686*	An alternate definition of double existential uniqueness (see 2eu4 2685). 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 "exists at most one"). (Contributed by NM, 26-Oct-2003.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥∃!𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜑) ↔ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑧∃𝑤∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤))))
Theorem	2eu6 2687*	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 2688	Two equivalent expressions for double existential uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-2005.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦∃𝑥𝜑) ↔ ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦(∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	2eu8 2689	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 2688. (Contributed by NM, 20-Feb-2005.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥∃!𝑦(∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜑) ↔ ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦(∃!𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	euae 2690*	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 32998 and dtru 5084. (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	euaeOLD 2691*	Obsolete version of euae 2690 as of 2-Mar-2023. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) State the theorem using truth constant ⊤. (Revised by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	exists1 2692*	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 5084. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑥 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	exists2 2693	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)
Theorem	exists2OLD 2694	Obsolete version of exists2 2693 as of 4-Mar-2023. (Contributed by NM, 10-Apr-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∃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 1812) 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/. 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 1888. 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/. 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 2701, celaront 2703, cesaro 2712, camestros 2714, felapton 2724, darapti 2722, calemos 2731, fesapo 2733, and bamalip 2735. 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 2695 to bamalip 2735) are all proven from { ax-mp 5, ax-1 6, ax-2 7, ax-3 8, ax-gen 1839, ax-4 1853 }, 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 2168 (inference form of sp 2167, which corresponds to the axiom (T) of modal logic), as demonstrated by dariiALT 2698, barbariALT 2702, festinoALT 2709, barocoALT 2711, daraptiALT 2723.
Theorem	barbara 2695	"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 is derived from [syl 17]" (quote after Theorem *2.06 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101). Most of the proof is in alsyl 1939. There are a legion of sources for Barbara, including http://www.friesian.com/aristotl.htm, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-logic/, and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 24-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜓)
Theorem	celarent 2696	"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 2695. 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. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 24-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	darii 2697	"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 2698 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 2698	Alternate proof of darii 2697, shorter but using more axioms. This shows how the use of spi 2168 may shorten some proofs of the Aristotelian syllogisms, even though this adds axiom dependencies. Note that spi 2168 is the inference associated with sp 2167, 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 2699	"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 2697. 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. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 24-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	barbarilem 2700	Lemma for barbari 2701 and the other Aristotelian syllogisms with existential assumption. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Sep-2022.)
⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)