P. 280 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 27901-28000   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	precsexlem10 27901*	Lemma for surreal reciprocal. Show that the union of the left sets is less than the union of the right sets. Note that this is the first theorem in the surreal numbers to require the axiom of infinity. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 15-Mar-2025.)
⊢ 𝐹 = rec((𝑝 ∈ V ↦ ⦋(1st ‘𝑝) / 𝑙⦌⦋(2nd ‘𝑝) / 𝑟⦌⟨(𝑙 ∪ ({𝑎 ∣ ∃𝑥𝑅 ∈ ( R ‘𝐴)∃𝑦𝐿 ∈ 𝑙 𝑎 = (( 1s +s ((𝑥𝑅 -s 𝐴) ·s 𝑦𝐿)) /su 𝑥𝑅)} ∪ {𝑎 ∣ ∃𝑥𝐿 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ ( L ‘𝐴) ∣ 0s <s 𝑥}∃𝑦𝑅 ∈ 𝑟 𝑎 = (( 1s +s ((𝑥𝐿 -s 𝐴) ·s 𝑦𝑅)) /su 𝑥𝐿)})), (𝑟 ∪ ({𝑎 ∣ ∃𝑥𝐿 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ ( L ‘𝐴) ∣ 0s <s 𝑥}∃𝑦𝐿 ∈ 𝑙 𝑎 = (( 1s +s ((𝑥𝐿 -s 𝐴) ·s 𝑦𝐿)) /su 𝑥𝐿)} ∪ {𝑎 ∣ ∃𝑥𝑅 ∈ ( R ‘𝐴)∃𝑦𝑅 ∈ 𝑟 𝑎 = (( 1s +s ((𝑥𝑅 -s 𝐴) ·s 𝑦𝑅)) /su 𝑥𝑅)}))⟩), ⟨{ 0s }, ∅⟩)    &   ⊢ 𝐿 = (1st ∘ 𝐹)    &   ⊢ 𝑅 = (2nd ∘ 𝐹)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 0s <s 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝑂 ∈ (( L ‘𝐴) ∪ ( R ‘𝐴))( 0s <s 𝑥𝑂 → ∃𝑦 ∈ No (𝑥𝑂 ·s 𝑦) = 1s ))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∪ (𝐿 “ ω) <<s ∪ (𝑅 “ ω))
Theorem	precsexlem11 27902*	Lemma for surreal reciprocal. Show that the cut of the left and right sets is a multiplicative inverse for 𝐴. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 15-Mar-2025.)
⊢ 𝐹 = rec((𝑝 ∈ V ↦ ⦋(1st ‘𝑝) / 𝑙⦌⦋(2nd ‘𝑝) / 𝑟⦌⟨(𝑙 ∪ ({𝑎 ∣ ∃𝑥𝑅 ∈ ( R ‘𝐴)∃𝑦𝐿 ∈ 𝑙 𝑎 = (( 1s +s ((𝑥𝑅 -s 𝐴) ·s 𝑦𝐿)) /su 𝑥𝑅)} ∪ {𝑎 ∣ ∃𝑥𝐿 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ ( L ‘𝐴) ∣ 0s <s 𝑥}∃𝑦𝑅 ∈ 𝑟 𝑎 = (( 1s +s ((𝑥𝐿 -s 𝐴) ·s 𝑦𝑅)) /su 𝑥𝐿)})), (𝑟 ∪ ({𝑎 ∣ ∃𝑥𝐿 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ ( L ‘𝐴) ∣ 0s <s 𝑥}∃𝑦𝐿 ∈ 𝑙 𝑎 = (( 1s +s ((𝑥𝐿 -s 𝐴) ·s 𝑦𝐿)) /su 𝑥𝐿)} ∪ {𝑎 ∣ ∃𝑥𝑅 ∈ ( R ‘𝐴)∃𝑦𝑅 ∈ 𝑟 𝑎 = (( 1s +s ((𝑥𝑅 -s 𝐴) ·s 𝑦𝑅)) /su 𝑥𝑅)}))⟩), ⟨{ 0s }, ∅⟩)    &   ⊢ 𝐿 = (1st ∘ 𝐹)    &   ⊢ 𝑅 = (2nd ∘ 𝐹)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 0s <s 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝑂 ∈ (( L ‘𝐴) ∪ ( R ‘𝐴))( 0s <s 𝑥𝑂 → ∃𝑦 ∈ No (𝑥𝑂 ·s 𝑦) = 1s ))    &   ⊢ 𝑌 = (∪ (𝐿 “ ω) |s ∪ (𝑅 “ ω))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ·s 𝑌) = 1s )
Theorem	precsex 27903*	Every positive surreal has a reciprocal. Theorem 10(iv) of [Conway] p. 21. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 15-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ No ∧ 0s <s 𝐴) → ∃𝑦 ∈ No (𝐴 ·s 𝑦) = 1s )
Theorem	recsex 27904*	A non-zero surreal has a reciprocal. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 15-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ No ∧ 𝐴 ≠ 0s ) → ∃𝑥 ∈ No (𝐴 ·s 𝑥) = 1s )
Theorem	recsexd 27905*	A non-zero surreal has a reciprocal. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 0s )    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥 ∈ No (𝐴 ·s 𝑥) = 1s )
Theorem	divsmul 27906	Relationship between surreal division and multiplication. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ No ∧ 𝐵 ∈ No ∧ (𝐶 ∈ No ∧ 𝐶 ≠ 0s )) → ((𝐴 /su 𝐶) = 𝐵 ↔ (𝐶 ·s 𝐵) = 𝐴))
Theorem	divsmuld 27907	Relationship between surreal division and multiplication. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ≠ 0s )    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴 /su 𝐶) = 𝐵 ↔ (𝐶 ·s 𝐵) = 𝐴))
Theorem	divscl 27908	Surreal division closure law. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ No ∧ 𝐵 ∈ No ∧ 𝐵 ≠ 0s ) → (𝐴 /su 𝐵) ∈ No )
Theorem	divscld 27909	Surreal division closure law. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ≠ 0s )    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 /su 𝐵) ∈ No )
Theorem	divscan2d 27910	A cancellation law for surreal division. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ≠ 0s )    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐵 ·s (𝐴 /su 𝐵)) = 𝐴)
Theorem	divscan1d 27911	A cancellation law for surreal division. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ≠ 0s )    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴 /su 𝐵) ·s 𝐵) = 𝐴)
Theorem	sltdivmuld 27912	Surreal less-than relationship between division and multiplication. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 0s <s 𝐶)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴 /su 𝐶) <s 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 <s (𝐶 ·s 𝐵)))
Theorem	sltdivmul2d 27913	Surreal less-than relationship between division and multiplication. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 0s <s 𝐶)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴 /su 𝐶) <s 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 <s (𝐵 ·s 𝐶)))
Theorem	sltmuldivd 27914	Surreal less-than relationship between division and multiplication. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 0s <s 𝐶)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴 ·s 𝐶) <s 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 <s (𝐵 /su 𝐶)))
Theorem	sltmuldiv2d 27915	Surreal less-than relationship between division and multiplication. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 0s <s 𝐶)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐶 ·s 𝐴) <s 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 <s (𝐵 /su 𝐶)))
Theorem	divsassd 27916	An associative law for surreal division. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 16-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ≠ 0s )    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴 ·s 𝐵) /su 𝐶) = (𝐴 ·s (𝐵 /su 𝐶)))
15.6  Subsystems of surreals
15.6.1  Ordinal numbers
Syntax	cons 27917	Declare the syntax for surreal ordinals.
class Ons
Definition	df-ons 27918	Define the surreal ordinals. These are the maximum members of each generation of surreals. Variant of definition from [Conway] p. 27. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 18-Mar-2025.)
⊢ Ons = {𝑥 ∈ No ∣ ( R ‘𝑥) = ∅}
Theorem	elons 27919	Membership in the class of surreal ordinals. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 18-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ Ons ↔ (𝐴 ∈ No ∧ ( R ‘𝐴) = ∅))
Theorem	onssno 27920	The surreal ordinals are a subclass of the surreals. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 18-Mar-2025.)
⊢ Ons ⊆ No
Theorem	onsno 27921	A surreal ordinal is a surreal. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 18-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ Ons → 𝐴 ∈ No )
Theorem	0ons 27922	Surreal zero is a surreal ordinal. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 18-Mar-2025.)
⊢ 0s ∈ Ons
Theorem	1ons 27923	Surreal one is a surreal ordinal. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 18-Mar-2025.)
⊢ 1s ∈ Ons
Theorem	elons2 27924*	A surreal is ordinal iff it is the cut of some set of surreals and the empty set. Definition from [Conway] p. 27. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 19-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ Ons ↔ ∃𝑎 ∈ 𝒫 No 𝐴 = (𝑎 |s ∅))
Theorem	elons2d 27925	The cut of any set of surreals and the empty set is a surreal ordinal. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 19-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ No )    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 = (𝐴 |s ∅))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ Ons)
Theorem	sltonold 27926*	The class of ordinals less than any surreal is a subset of that surreal's old set. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 22-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ No → {𝑥 ∈ Ons ∣ 𝑥 <s 𝐴} ⊆ ( O ‘( bday ‘𝐴)))
Theorem	sltonex 27927*	The class of ordinals less than any particular surreal is a set. Theorem 14 of [Conway] p. 27. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 22-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ No → {𝑥 ∈ Ons ∣ 𝑥 <s 𝐴} ∈ V)
Theorem	onscutleft 27928	A surreal ordinal is equal to the cut of its left set and the empty set. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 29-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ Ons → 𝐴 = (( L ‘𝐴) |s ∅))
15.6.2  Natural numbers
Syntax	cnn0s 27929	Declare the syntax for surreal non-negative integers.
class ℕ0s
Syntax	cnns 27930	Declare the syntax for surreal positive integers.
class ℕs
Definition	df-n0s 27931	Define the set of non-negative surreal integers. This set behaves similarly to ω and ℕ0, but it is a set of surreal numbers. Like those two sets, it satisfies the Peano axioms and is closed under (surreal) addition and multiplication. Compare df-nn 12217. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ℕ0s = (rec((𝑥 ∈ V ↦ (𝑥 +s 1s )), 0s ) “ ω)
Definition	df-nns 27932	Define the set of positive surreal integers. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ℕs = (ℕ0s ∖ { 0s })
Theorem	n0sex 27933	The set of all non-negative surreal integers exists. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ℕ0s ∈ V
Theorem	nnsex 27934	The set of all positive surreal integers exists. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ℕs ∈ V
Theorem	peano5n0s 27935*	Peano's inductive postulate for non-negative surreal integers. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (( 0s ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 +s 1s ) ∈ 𝐴) → ℕ0s ⊆ 𝐴)
Theorem	n0ssno 27936	The non-negative surreal integers are a subset of the surreals. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ℕ0s ⊆ No
Theorem	nnssn0s 27937	The positive surreal integers are a subset of the non-negative surreal integers. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ℕs ⊆ ℕ0s
Theorem	nnssno 27938	The positive surreal integers are a subset of the surreals. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ℕs ⊆ No
Theorem	0n0s 27939	Peano postulate: 0s is a non-negative surreal integer. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ 0s ∈ ℕ0s
Theorem	peano2n0s 27940	Peano postulate: the successor of a non-negative surreal integer is a non-negative surreal integer. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ℕ0s → (𝐴 +s 1s ) ∈ ℕ0s)
Theorem	dfn0s2 27941*	Alternate definition of the set of non-negative surreal integers. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ ℕ0s = ∩ {𝑥 ∣ ( 0s ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 (𝑦 +s 1s ) ∈ 𝑥)}
Theorem	n0sind 27942*	Principle of Mathematical Induction (inference schema). Compare nnind 12234 and finds 7891. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 17-Mar-2025.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 0s → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = (𝑦 +s 1s ) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜏))    &   ⊢ 𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑦 ∈ ℕ0s → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ℕ0s → 𝜏)
Theorem	n0scut 27943	A cut form for surreal naturals. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 2-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ℕ0s → 𝐴 = ({(𝐴 -s 1s )} |s ∅))
Theorem	n0ons 27944	A surreal natural is a surreal ordinal. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 2-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ℕ0s → 𝐴 ∈ Ons)
PART 16  ELEMENTARY GEOMETRY This part develops elementary geometry based on Tarski's axioms, following [Schwabhauser]. Tarski's geometry is a first-order theory with one sort, the "points". It has two primitive notions, the ternary predicate of "betweenness" and the quaternary predicate of "congruence". To adapt this theory to the framework of set.mm, and to be able to talk of *a* Tarski structure as a space satisfying the given axioms, we use the following definition, stated informally: A Tarski structure 𝑓 is a set (of points) (Base‘𝑓) together with functions (Itv‘𝑓) and (dist‘𝑓) on ((Base‘𝑓) × (Base‘𝑓)) satisfying certain axioms (given in Definitions df-trkg 27971 et sequentes). This allows to treat a Tarski structure as a special kind of extensible structure (see df-struct 17084). The translation to and from Tarski's treatment is as follows (given, again, informally). Suppose that one is given an extensible structure 𝑓. One defines a betweenness ternary predicate Btw by positing that, for any 𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧 ∈ (Base‘𝑓), one has "Btw 𝑥𝑦𝑧 " if and only if 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥(Itv‘𝑓)𝑧, and a congruence quaternary predicate Congr by positing that, for any 𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧, 𝑡 ∈ (Base‘𝑓), one has "Congr 𝑥𝑦𝑧𝑡 " if and only if 𝑥(dist‘𝑓)𝑦 = 𝑧(dist‘𝑓)𝑡. It is easy to check that if 𝑓 satisfies our Tarski axioms, then Btw and Congr satisfy Tarski's Tarski axioms when (Base‘𝑓) is interpreted as the universe of discourse. Conversely, suppose that one is given a set 𝑎, a ternary predicate Btw, and a quaternary predicate Congr. One defines the extensible structure 𝑓 such that (Base‘𝑓) is 𝑎, and (Itv‘𝑓) is the function which associates with each ⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∈ (𝑎 × 𝑎) the set of points 𝑧 ∈ 𝑎 such that "Btw 𝑥𝑧𝑦", and (dist‘𝑓) is the function which associates with each ⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∈ (𝑎 × 𝑎) the set of ordered pairs ⟨𝑧, 𝑡⟩ ∈ (𝑎 × 𝑎) such that "Congr 𝑥𝑦𝑧𝑡". It is easy to check that if Btw and Congr satisfy Tarski's Tarski axioms when 𝑎 is interpreted as the universe of discourse, then 𝑓 satisfies our Tarski axioms. We intentionally choose to represent congruence (without loss of generality) as 𝑥(dist‘𝑓)𝑦 = 𝑧(dist‘𝑓)𝑡 instead of "Congr 𝑥𝑦𝑧𝑡", as it is more convenient. It is always possible to define dist for any particular geometry to produce equal results when conguence is desired, and in many cases there is an obvious interpretation of "distance" between two points that can be useful in other situations. Encoding congruence as an equality of distances makes it easier to use these theorems in cases where there is a preferred distance function. We prove that representing a congruence relationship using a distance in the form 𝑥(dist‘𝑓)𝑦 = 𝑧(dist‘𝑓)𝑡 causes no loss of generality in tgjustc1 27993 and tgjustc2 27994, which in turn are supported by tgjustf 27991 and tgjustr 27992. A similar representation of congruence (using a "distance" function) is used in Axiom A1 of [Beeson2016] p. 5, which discusses how a large number of formalized proofs were found in Tarskian Geometry using OTTER. Their detailed proofs in Tarski Geometry, along with other information, are available at https://www.michaelbeeson.com/research/FormalTarski/ 27992. Most theorems are in deduction form, as this is a very general, simple, and convenient format to use in Metamath. An assertion in deduction form can be easily converted into an assertion in inference form (removing the antecedents 𝜑 →) by insert a ⊤ → in each hypothesis, using a1i 11, then using mptru 1546 to remove the final ⊤ → prefix. In some cases we represent, without loss of generality, an implication antecedent in [Schwabhauser] as a hypothesis. The implication can be retrieved from the by using simpr 483, the theorem as stated, and ex 411. For descriptions of individual axioms, we refer to the specific definitions below. A particular feature of Tarski's axioms is modularity, so by using various subsets of the set of axioms, we can define the classes of "absolute dimensionless Tarski structures" (df-trkg 27971), of "Euclidean dimensionless Tarski structures" (df-trkge 27969) and of "Tarski structures of dimension no less than N" (df-trkgld 27970). In this system, angles are not a primitive notion, but instead a derived notion (see df-cgra 28326 and iscgra 28327). To maintain its simplicity, in this system congruence between shapes (a finite sequence of points) is the case where corresponding segments between all corresponding points are congruent. This includes triangles (a shape of 3 distinct points). Note that this definition has no direct regard for angles. For more details and rationale, see df-cgrg 28029. The first section is devoted to the definitions of these various structures. The second section ("Tarskian geometry") develops the synthetic treatment of geometry. The remaining sections prove that real Euclidean spaces and complex Hilbert spaces, with intended interpretations, are Euclidean Tarski structures. Most of the work in this part is due to Thierry Arnoux, with earlier work by Mario Carneiro and Scott Fenton. See also the credits in the comment of each statement.
16.1  Definition and Tarski's Axioms of Geometry
Syntax	cstrkg 27945	Extends class notation with the class of Tarski geometries.
class TarskiG
Syntax	cstrkgc 27946	Extends class notation with the class of geometries fulfilling the congruence axioms.
class TarskiGC
Syntax	cstrkgb 27947	Extends class notation with the class of geometries fulfilling the betweenness axioms.
class TarskiGB
Syntax	cstrkgcb 27948	Extends class notation with the class of geometries fulfilling the congruence and betweenness axioms.
class TarskiGCB
Syntax	cstrkgld 27949	Extends class notation with the relation for geometries fulfilling the lower dimension axioms.
class DimTarskiG≥
Syntax	cstrkge 27950	Extends class notation with the class of geometries fulfilling Euclid's axiom.
class TarskiGE
Syntax	citv 27951	Declare the syntax for the Interval (segment) index extractor.
class Itv
Syntax	clng 27952	Declare the syntax for the Line function.
class LineG
Definition	df-itv 27953	Define the Interval (segment) index extractor for Tarski geometries. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.) Use its index-independent form itvid 27957 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Itv = Slot ;16
Definition	df-lng 27954	Define the line index extractor for geometries. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 27-Mar-2019.) Use its index-independent form lngid 27958 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ LineG = Slot ;17
Theorem	itvndx 27955	Index value of the Interval (segment) slot. Use ndxarg 17133. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (Itv‘ndx) = ;16
Theorem	lngndx 27956	Index value of the "line" slot. Use ndxarg 17133. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 27-Mar-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (LineG‘ndx) = ;17
Theorem	itvid 27957	Utility theorem: index-independent form of df-itv 27953. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.)
⊢ Itv = Slot (Itv‘ndx)
Theorem	lngid 27958	Utility theorem: index-independent form of df-lng 27954. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 27-Mar-2019.)
⊢ LineG = Slot (LineG‘ndx)
Theorem	slotsinbpsd 27959	The slots Base, +g, ·𝑠 and dist are different from the slot Itv. Formerly part of ttglem 28395 and proofs using it. (Contributed by AV, 29-Oct-2024.)
⊢ (((Itv‘ndx) ≠ (Base‘ndx) ∧ (Itv‘ndx) ≠ (+g‘ndx)) ∧ ((Itv‘ndx) ≠ ( ·𝑠 ‘ndx) ∧ (Itv‘ndx) ≠ (dist‘ndx)))
Theorem	slotslnbpsd 27960	The slots Base, +g, ·𝑠 and dist are different from the slot LineG. Formerly part of ttglem 28395 and proofs using it. (Contributed by AV, 29-Oct-2024.)
⊢ (((LineG‘ndx) ≠ (Base‘ndx) ∧ (LineG‘ndx) ≠ (+g‘ndx)) ∧ ((LineG‘ndx) ≠ ( ·𝑠 ‘ndx) ∧ (LineG‘ndx) ≠ (dist‘ndx)))
Theorem	lngndxnitvndx 27961	The slot for the line is not the slot for the Interval (segment) in an extensible structure. Formerly part of proof for ttgval 28393. (Contributed by AV, 9-Nov-2024.)
⊢ (LineG‘ndx) ≠ (Itv‘ndx)
Theorem	trkgstr 27962	Functionality of a Tarski geometry. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.)
⊢ 𝑊 = {⟨(Base‘ndx), 𝑈⟩, ⟨(dist‘ndx), 𝐷⟩, ⟨(Itv‘ndx), 𝐼⟩}    ⇒   ⊢ 𝑊 Struct ⟨1, ;16⟩
Theorem	trkgbas 27963	The base set of a Tarski geometry. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.)
⊢ 𝑊 = {⟨(Base‘ndx), 𝑈⟩, ⟨(dist‘ndx), 𝐷⟩, ⟨(Itv‘ndx), 𝐼⟩}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑈 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝑈 = (Base‘𝑊))
Theorem	trkgdist 27964	The measure of a distance in a Tarski geometry. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.)
⊢ 𝑊 = {⟨(Base‘ndx), 𝑈⟩, ⟨(dist‘ndx), 𝐷⟩, ⟨(Itv‘ndx), 𝐼⟩}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐷 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝐷 = (dist‘𝑊))
Theorem	trkgitv 27965	The congruence relation in a Tarski geometry. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.)
⊢ 𝑊 = {⟨(Base‘ndx), 𝑈⟩, ⟨(dist‘ndx), 𝐷⟩, ⟨(Itv‘ndx), 𝐼⟩}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐼 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝑊))
Definition	df-trkgc 27966*	Define the class of geometries fulfilling the congruence axioms of reflexivity, identity and transitivity. These are axioms A1 to A3 of [Schwabhauser] p. 10. With our distance based notation for congruence, transitivity of congruence boils down to transitivity of equality and is already given by eqtr 2753, so it is not listed in this definition. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.)
⊢ TarskiGC = {𝑓 ∣ [(Base‘𝑓) / 𝑝][(dist‘𝑓) / 𝑑](∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑝 (𝑥𝑑𝑦) = (𝑦𝑑𝑥) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑝 ((𝑥𝑑𝑦) = (𝑧𝑑𝑧) → 𝑥 = 𝑦))}
Definition	df-trkgb 27967*	Define the class of geometries fulfilling the 3 betweenness axioms in Tarski's Axiomatization of Geometry: identity, Axiom A6 of [Schwabhauser] p. 11, axiom of Pasch, Axiom A7 of [Schwabhauser] p. 12, and continuity, Axiom A11 of [Schwabhauser] p. 13. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.)
⊢ TarskiGB = {𝑓 ∣ [(Base‘𝑓) / 𝑝][(Itv‘𝑓) / 𝑖](∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑝 (𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑥) → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝑝 ((𝑢 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑧) ∧ 𝑣 ∈ (𝑦𝑖𝑧)) → ∃𝑎 ∈ 𝑝 (𝑎 ∈ (𝑢𝑖𝑦) ∧ 𝑎 ∈ (𝑣𝑖𝑥))) ∧ ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝒫 𝑝∀𝑡 ∈ 𝒫 𝑝(∃𝑎 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑠 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑡 𝑥 ∈ (𝑎𝑖𝑦) → ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑠 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑡 𝑏 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑦)))}
Definition	df-trkgcb 27968*	Define the class of geometries fulfilling the five segment axiom, Axiom A5 of [Schwabhauser] p. 11, and segment construction axiom, Axiom A4 of [Schwabhauser] p. 11. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ TarskiGCB = {𝑓 ∣ [(Base‘𝑓) / 𝑝][(dist‘𝑓) / 𝑑][(Itv‘𝑓) / 𝑖](∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑎 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑏 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑐 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝑝 (((𝑥 ≠ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑧) ∧ 𝑏 ∈ (𝑎𝑖𝑐)) ∧ (((𝑥𝑑𝑦) = (𝑎𝑑𝑏) ∧ (𝑦𝑑𝑧) = (𝑏𝑑𝑐)) ∧ ((𝑥𝑑𝑢) = (𝑎𝑑𝑣) ∧ (𝑦𝑑𝑢) = (𝑏𝑑𝑣)))) → (𝑧𝑑𝑢) = (𝑐𝑑𝑣)) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑎 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑏 ∈ 𝑝 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑝 (𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑧) ∧ (𝑦𝑑𝑧) = (𝑎𝑑𝑏)))}
Definition	df-trkge 27969*	Define the class of geometries fulfilling Euclid's axiom, Axiom A10 of [Schwabhauser] p. 13. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ TarskiGE = {𝑓 ∣ [(Base‘𝑓) / 𝑝][(Itv‘𝑓) / 𝑖]∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝑝 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝑝 ((𝑢 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑣) ∧ 𝑢 ∈ (𝑦𝑖𝑧) ∧ 𝑥 ≠ 𝑢) → ∃𝑎 ∈ 𝑝 ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝑝 (𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑎) ∧ 𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑏) ∧ 𝑣 ∈ (𝑎𝑖𝑏)))}
Definition	df-trkgld 27970*	Define the class of geometries fulfilling the lower dimension axiom for dimension 𝑛. For such geometries, there are three non-colinear points that are equidistant from 𝑛 − 1 distinct points. Derived from remarks in Tarski's System of Geometry, Alfred Tarski and Steven Givant, Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, Volume 5, Number 2 (1999), 175-214. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 22-Apr-2013.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 23-Nov-2019.)
⊢ DimTarskiG≥ = {⟨𝑔, 𝑛⟩ ∣ [(Base‘𝑔) / 𝑝][(dist‘𝑔) / 𝑑][(Itv‘𝑔) / 𝑖]∃𝑓(𝑓:(1..^𝑛)–1-1→𝑝 ∧ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑝 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑝 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑝 (∀𝑗 ∈ (2..^𝑛)(((𝑓‘1)𝑑𝑥) = ((𝑓‘𝑗)𝑑𝑥) ∧ ((𝑓‘1)𝑑𝑦) = ((𝑓‘𝑗)𝑑𝑦) ∧ ((𝑓‘1)𝑑𝑧) = ((𝑓‘𝑗)𝑑𝑧)) ∧ ¬ (𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑦) ∨ 𝑥 ∈ (𝑧𝑖𝑦) ∨ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑧))))}
Definition	df-trkg 27971*	Define the class of Tarski geometries. A Tarski geometry is a set of points, equipped with a betweenness relation (denoting that a point lies on a line segment between two other points) and a congruence relation (denoting equality of line segment lengths). Here, we are using the following: for congruence, (𝑥 − 𝑦) = (𝑧 − 𝑤) where − = (dist‘𝑊) for betweenness, 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑧), where 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝑊) With this definition, the axiom A2 is actually equivalent to the transitivity of equality, eqtrd 2770. Tarski originally had more axioms, but later reduced his list to 11: A1 A kind of reflexivity for the congruence relation (TarskiGC) A2 Transitivity for the congruence relation (TarskiGC) A3 Identity for the congruence relation (TarskiGC) A4 Axiom of segment construction (TarskiGCB) A5 5-segment axiom (TarskiGCB) A6 Identity for the betweenness relation (TarskiGB) A7 Axiom of Pasch (TarskiGB) A8 Lower dimension axiom (◡DimTarskiG≥ “ {2}) A9 Upper dimension axiom (V ∖ (◡DimTarskiG≥ “ {3})) A10 Euclid's axiom (TarskiGE) A11 Axiom of continuity (TarskiGB) Our definition is split into 5 parts: congruence axioms TarskiGC (which metric spaces fulfill) betweenness axioms TarskiGB congruence and betweenness axioms TarskiGCB upper and lower dimension axioms DimTarskiG≥ axiom of Euclid / parallel postulate TarskiGE So our definition of a Tarskian Geometry includes the 3 axioms for the quaternary congruence relation (A1, A2, A3), the 3 axioms for the ternary betweenness relation (A6, A7, A11), and the 2 axioms of compatibility of the congruence and the betweenness relations (A4,A5). It does not include Euclid's axiom A10, nor the 2-dimensional axioms A8 (Lower dimension axiom) and A9 (Upper dimension axiom) so the number of dimensions of the geometry it formalizes is not constrained. Considering A2 as one of the 3 axioms for the quaternary congruence relation is somewhat conventional, because the transitivity of the congruence relation is automatically given by our choice to take the distance as this congruence relation in our definition of Tarski geometries. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 24-Aug-2017.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 27-Apr-2019.)
⊢ TarskiG = ((TarskiGC ∩ TarskiGB) ∩ (TarskiGCB ∩ {𝑓 ∣ [(Base‘𝑓) / 𝑝][(Itv‘𝑓) / 𝑖](LineG‘𝑓) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝑝, 𝑦 ∈ (𝑝 ∖ {𝑥}) ↦ {𝑧 ∈ 𝑝 ∣ (𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑦) ∨ 𝑥 ∈ (𝑧𝑖𝑦) ∨ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑧))})}))
Theorem	istrkgc 27972*	Property of being a Tarski geometry - congruence part. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐺 ∈ TarskiGC ↔ (𝐺 ∈ V ∧ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 (𝑥 − 𝑦) = (𝑦 − 𝑥) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 ((𝑥 − 𝑦) = (𝑧 − 𝑧) → 𝑥 = 𝑦))))
Theorem	istrkgb 27973*	Property of being a Tarski geometry - betweenness part. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐺 ∈ TarskiGB ↔ (𝐺 ∈ V ∧ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 (𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑥) → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝑃 ((𝑢 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑧) ∧ 𝑣 ∈ (𝑦𝐼𝑧)) → ∃𝑎 ∈ 𝑃 (𝑎 ∈ (𝑢𝐼𝑦) ∧ 𝑎 ∈ (𝑣𝐼𝑥))) ∧ ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝒫 𝑃∀𝑡 ∈ 𝒫 𝑃(∃𝑎 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑠 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑡 𝑥 ∈ (𝑎𝐼𝑦) → ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑠 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑡 𝑏 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑦)))))
Theorem	istrkgcb 27974*	Property of being a Tarski geometry - congruence and betweenness part. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐺 ∈ TarskiGCB ↔ (𝐺 ∈ V ∧ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑎 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑏 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑐 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝑃 (((𝑥 ≠ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑧) ∧ 𝑏 ∈ (𝑎𝐼𝑐)) ∧ (((𝑥 − 𝑦) = (𝑎 − 𝑏) ∧ (𝑦 − 𝑧) = (𝑏 − 𝑐)) ∧ ((𝑥 − 𝑢) = (𝑎 − 𝑣) ∧ (𝑦 − 𝑢) = (𝑏 − 𝑣)))) → (𝑧 − 𝑢) = (𝑐 − 𝑣)) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑎 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑏 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 (𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑧) ∧ (𝑦 − 𝑧) = (𝑎 − 𝑏)))))
Theorem	istrkge 27975*	Property of fulfilling Euclid's axiom. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐺 ∈ TarskiGE ↔ (𝐺 ∈ V ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝑃 ((𝑢 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑣) ∧ 𝑢 ∈ (𝑦𝐼𝑧) ∧ 𝑥 ≠ 𝑢) → ∃𝑎 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝑃 (𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑎) ∧ 𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑏) ∧ 𝑣 ∈ (𝑎𝐼𝑏)))))
Theorem	istrkgl 27976*	Building lines from the segment property. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐺 ∈ {𝑓 ∣ [(Base‘𝑓) / 𝑝][(Itv‘𝑓) / 𝑖](LineG‘𝑓) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝑝, 𝑦 ∈ (𝑝 ∖ {𝑥}) ↦ {𝑧 ∈ 𝑝 ∣ (𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑦) ∨ 𝑥 ∈ (𝑧𝑖𝑦) ∨ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝑖𝑧))})} ↔ (𝐺 ∈ V ∧ (LineG‘𝐺) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝑃, 𝑦 ∈ (𝑃 ∖ {𝑥}) ↦ {𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 ∣ (𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑥 ∈ (𝑧𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑧))})))
Theorem	istrkgld 27977*	Property of fulfilling the lower dimension 𝑁 axiom. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 20-Nov-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐺 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ (ℤ≥‘2)) → (𝐺DimTarskiG≥𝑁 ↔ ∃𝑓(𝑓:(1..^𝑁)–1-1→𝑃 ∧ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 (∀𝑗 ∈ (2..^𝑁)(((𝑓‘1) − 𝑥) = ((𝑓‘𝑗) − 𝑥) ∧ ((𝑓‘1) − 𝑦) = ((𝑓‘𝑗) − 𝑦) ∧ ((𝑓‘1) − 𝑧) = ((𝑓‘𝑗) − 𝑧)) ∧ ¬ (𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑥 ∈ (𝑧𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑧))))))
Theorem	istrkg2ld 27978*	Property of fulfilling the lower dimension 2 axiom. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 20-Nov-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐺 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐺DimTarskiG≥2 ↔ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 ¬ (𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑥 ∈ (𝑧𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑧))))
Theorem	istrkg3ld 27979*	Property of fulfilling the lower dimension 3 axiom. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 12-Jul-2020.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐺 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐺DimTarskiG≥3 ↔ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑃 (𝑢 ≠ 𝑣 ∧ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 (((𝑢 − 𝑥) = (𝑣 − 𝑥) ∧ (𝑢 − 𝑦) = (𝑣 − 𝑦) ∧ (𝑢 − 𝑧) = (𝑣 − 𝑧)) ∧ ¬ (𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑥 ∈ (𝑧𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑧))))))
Theorem	axtgcgrrflx 27980	Axiom of reflexivity of congruence, Axiom A1 of [Schwabhauser] p. 10. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝑃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑋 − 𝑌) = (𝑌 − 𝑋))
Theorem	axtgcgrid 27981	Axiom of identity of congruence, Axiom A3 of [Schwabhauser] p. 10. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑍 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑋 − 𝑌) = (𝑍 − 𝑍))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 = 𝑌)
Theorem	axtgsegcon 27982*	Axiom of segment construction, Axiom A4 of [Schwabhauser] p. 11. As discussed in Axiom 4 of [Tarski1999] p. 178, "The intuitive content [is that] given any line segment 𝐴𝐵, one can construct a line segment congruent to it, starting at any point 𝑌 and going in the direction of any ray containing 𝑌. The ray is determined by the point 𝑌 and a second point 𝑋, the endpoint of the ray. The other endpoint of the line segment to be constructed is just the point 𝑧 whose existence is asserted." (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 15-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 (𝑌 ∈ (𝑋𝐼𝑧) ∧ (𝑌 − 𝑧) = (𝐴 − 𝐵)))
Theorem	axtg5seg 27983	Five segments axiom, Axiom A5 of [Schwabhauser] p. 11. Take two triangles 𝑋𝑍𝑈 and 𝐴𝐶𝑉, a point 𝑌 on 𝑋𝑍, and a point 𝐵 on 𝐴𝐶. If all corresponding line segments except for 𝑍𝑈 and 𝐶𝑉 are congruent ( i.e., 𝑋𝑌 ∼ 𝐴𝐵, 𝑌𝑍 ∼ 𝐵𝐶, 𝑋𝑈 ∼ 𝐴𝑉, and 𝑌𝑈 ∼ 𝐵𝑉), then 𝑍𝑈 and 𝐶𝑉 are also congruent. As noted in Axiom 5 of [Tarski1999] p. 178, "this axiom is similar in character to the well-known theorems of Euclidean geometry that allow one to conclude, from hypotheses about the congruence of certain corresponding sides and angles in two triangles, the congruence of other corresponding sides and angles." (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 14-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑍 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑉 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ≠ 𝑌)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ (𝑋𝐼𝑍))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ (𝐴𝐼𝐶))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑋 − 𝑌) = (𝐴 − 𝐵))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑌 − 𝑍) = (𝐵 − 𝐶))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑋 − 𝑈) = (𝐴 − 𝑉))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑌 − 𝑈) = (𝐵 − 𝑉))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑍 − 𝑈) = (𝐶 − 𝑉))
Theorem	axtgbtwnid 27984	Identity of Betweenness. Axiom A6 of [Schwabhauser] p. 11. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 15-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ (𝑋𝐼𝑋))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 = 𝑌)
Theorem	axtgpasch 27985*	Axiom of (Inner) Pasch, Axiom A7 of [Schwabhauser] p. 12. Given triangle 𝑋𝑌𝑍, point 𝑈 in segment 𝑋𝑍, and point 𝑉 in segment 𝑌𝑍, there exists a point 𝑎 on both the segment 𝑈𝑌 and the segment 𝑉𝑋. This axiom is essentially a subset of the general Pasch axiom. The general Pasch axiom asserts that on a plane "a line intersecting a triangle in one of its sides, and not intersecting any of the vertices, must intersect one of the other two sides" (per the discussion about Axiom 7 of [Tarski1999] p. 179). The (general) Pasch axiom was used implicitly by Euclid, but never stated; Moritz Pasch discovered its omission in 1882. As noted in the Metamath book, this means that the omission of Pasch's axiom from Euclid went unnoticed for 2000 years. Only the inner Pasch algorithm is included as an axiom; the "outer" form of the Pasch axiom can be proved using the inner form (see theorem 9.6 of [Schwabhauser] p. 69 and the brief discussion in axiom 7.1 of [Tarski1999] p. 180). (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 15-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑍 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑉 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ (𝑋𝐼𝑍))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑉 ∈ (𝑌𝐼𝑍))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑎 ∈ 𝑃 (𝑎 ∈ (𝑈𝐼𝑌) ∧ 𝑎 ∈ (𝑉𝐼𝑋)))
Theorem	axtgcont1 27986*	Axiom of Continuity. Axiom A11 of [Schwabhauser] p. 13. This axiom (scheme) asserts that any two sets 𝑆 and 𝑇 (of points) such that the elements of 𝑆 precede the elements of 𝑇 with respect to some point 𝑎 (that is, 𝑥 is between 𝑎 and 𝑦 whenever 𝑥 is in 𝑋 and 𝑦 is in 𝑌) are separated by some point 𝑏; this is explained in Axiom 11 of [Tarski1999] p. 185. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 16-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑆 ⊆ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ⊆ 𝑃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑎 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑆 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑇 𝑥 ∈ (𝑎𝐼𝑦) → ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑆 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑇 𝑏 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑦)))
Theorem	axtgcont 27987*	Axiom of Continuity. Axiom A11 of [Schwabhauser] p. 13. For more information see axtgcont1 27986. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 16-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑆 ⊆ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ⊆ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑢 ∈ 𝑆 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑇) → 𝑢 ∈ (𝐴𝐼𝑣))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑆 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑇 𝑏 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑦))
Theorem	axtglowdim2 27988*	Lower dimension axiom for dimension 2, Axiom A8 of [Schwabhauser] p. 13. There exist 3 non-colinear points. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 20-Nov-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ 𝑉)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺DimTarskiG≥2)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 ¬ (𝑧 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑥 ∈ (𝑧𝐼𝑦) ∨ 𝑦 ∈ (𝑥𝐼𝑧)))
Theorem	axtgupdim2 27989	Upper dimension axiom for dimension 2, Axiom A9 of [Schwabhauser] p. 13. Three points 𝑋, 𝑌 and 𝑍 equidistant to two given two points 𝑈 and 𝑉 must be colinear. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 29-May-2019.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 11-Jul-2020.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑍 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑉 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ≠ 𝑉)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑈 − 𝑋) = (𝑉 − 𝑋))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑈 − 𝑌) = (𝑉 − 𝑌))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑈 − 𝑍) = (𝑉 − 𝑍))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ 𝑉)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝐺DimTarskiG≥3)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑍 ∈ (𝑋𝐼𝑌) ∨ 𝑋 ∈ (𝑍𝐼𝑌) ∨ 𝑌 ∈ (𝑋𝐼𝑍)))
Theorem	axtgeucl 27990*	Euclid's Axiom. Axiom A10 of [Schwabhauser] p. 13. This is equivalent to Euclid's parallel postulate when combined with other axioms. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 16-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiGE)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑍 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑉 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ (𝑋𝐼𝑉))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ (𝑌𝐼𝑍))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ≠ 𝑈)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑎 ∈ 𝑃 ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝑃 (𝑌 ∈ (𝑋𝐼𝑎) ∧ 𝑍 ∈ (𝑋𝐼𝑏) ∧ 𝑉 ∈ (𝑎𝐼𝑏)))
16.1.1  Justification for the congruence notation
Theorem	tgjustf 27991*	Given any function 𝐹, equality of the image by 𝐹 is an equivalence relation. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 25-Jan-2023.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ∃𝑟(𝑟 Er 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥𝑟𝑦 ↔ (𝐹‘𝑥) = (𝐹‘𝑦))))
Theorem	tgjustr 27992*	Given any equivalence relation 𝑅, one can define a function 𝑓 such that all elements of an equivalence classe of 𝑅 have the same image by 𝑓. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 25-Jan-2023.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑅 Er 𝐴) → ∃𝑓(𝑓 Fn 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ↔ (𝑓‘𝑥) = (𝑓‘𝑦))))
Theorem	tgjustc1 27993*	A justification for using distance equality instead of the textbook relation on pairs of points for congruence. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 29-Jan-2023.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑟(𝑟 Er (𝑃 × 𝑃) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 (⟨𝑤, 𝑥⟩𝑟⟨𝑦, 𝑧⟩ ↔ (𝑤 − 𝑥) = (𝑦 − 𝑧)))
Theorem	tgjustc2 27994*	A justification for using distance equality instead of the textbook relation on pairs of points for congruence. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 29-Jan-2023.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝑅 Er (𝑃 × 𝑃)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑑(𝑑 Fn (𝑃 × 𝑃) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑃 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑃 (⟨𝑤, 𝑥⟩𝑅⟨𝑦, 𝑧⟩ ↔ (𝑤𝑑𝑥) = (𝑦𝑑𝑧)))
16.2  Tarskian Geometry
16.2.1  Congruence
Theorem	tgcgrcomimp 27995	Congruence commutes on the RHS. Theorem 2.5 of [Schwabhauser] p. 27. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 29-Jun-2020.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 ∈ 𝑃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴 − 𝐵) = (𝐶 − 𝐷) → (𝐴 − 𝐵) = (𝐷 − 𝐶)))
Theorem	tgcgrcomr 27996	Congruence commutes on the RHS. Variant of Theorem 2.5 of [Schwabhauser] p. 27, but in a convenient form for a common case. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 29-Jun-2020.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 − 𝐵) = (𝐶 − 𝐷))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 − 𝐵) = (𝐷 − 𝐶))
Theorem	tgcgrcoml 27997	Congruence commutes on the LHS. Variant of Theorem 2.5 of [Schwabhauser] p. 27, but in a convenient form for a common case. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 29-Jun-2020.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 − 𝐵) = (𝐶 − 𝐷))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐵 − 𝐴) = (𝐶 − 𝐷))
Theorem	tgcgrcomlr 27998	Congruence commutes on both sides. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 23-Mar-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 − 𝐵) = (𝐶 − 𝐷))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐵 − 𝐴) = (𝐷 − 𝐶))
Theorem	tgcgreqb 27999	Congruence and equality. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 27-Aug-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 − 𝐵) = (𝐶 − 𝐷))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 = 𝐵 ↔ 𝐶 = 𝐷))
Theorem	tgcgreq 28000	Congruence and equality. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 27-Aug-2019.)
⊢ 𝑃 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ − = (dist‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝐼 = (Itv‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ TarskiG)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 ∈ 𝑃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 − 𝐵) = (𝐶 − 𝐷))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷)