Home | Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 31 of 464) | < Previous Next > |
Bad symbols? Try the
GIF version. |
||
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > MPE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
Color key: | Metamath Proof Explorer
(1-29181) |
Hilbert Space Explorer
(29182-30704) |
Users' Mathboxes
(30705-46395) |
Type | Label | Description |
---|---|---|
Statement | ||
Theorem | nesymir 3001 | Inference associated with nesym 2999. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Jul-2018.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ ¬ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | neeq1d 3002 | Deduction for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-1999.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | neeq2d 3003 | Deduction for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-1999.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶 ≠ 𝐴 ↔ 𝐶 ≠ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | neeq12d 3004 | Deduction for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 24-Jul-2012.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | neeq1 3005 | Equality theorem for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | neeq2 3006 | Equality theorem for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐶 ≠ 𝐴 ↔ 𝐶 ≠ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | neeq1i 3007 | Inference for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 29-Apr-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | neeq2i 3008 | Inference for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 29-Apr-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐶 ≠ 𝐴 ↔ 𝐶 ≠ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | neeq12i 3009 | Inference for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 24-Jul-2012.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 & ⊢ 𝐶 = 𝐷 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐷) | ||
Theorem | eqnetrd 3010 | Substitution of equal classes into an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | eqnetrrd 3011 | Substitution of equal classes into an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | neeqtrd 3012 | Substitution of equal classes into an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | eqnetri 3013 | Substitution of equal classes into an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 & ⊢ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 | ||
Theorem | eqnetrri 3014 | Substitution of equal classes into an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 & ⊢ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶 | ||
Theorem | neeqtri 3015 | Substitution of equal classes into an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 & ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐶 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 | ||
Theorem | neeqtrri 3016 | Substitution of equal classes into an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 & ⊢ 𝐶 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 | ||
Theorem | neeqtrrd 3017 | Substitution of equal classes into an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | eqnetrrid 3018 | A chained equality inference for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 6-Jun-2012.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐴 & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | 3netr3d 3019 | Substitution of equality into both sides of an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 24-Jul-2012.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷) | ||
Theorem | 3netr4d 3020 | Substitution of equality into both sides of an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 24-Jul-2012.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷) | ||
Theorem | 3netr3g 3021 | Substitution of equality into both sides of an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 24-Jul-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐶 & ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐷 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷) | ||
Theorem | 3netr4g 3022 | Substitution of equality into both sides of an inequality. (Contributed by NM, 14-Jun-2012.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐶 = 𝐴 & ⊢ 𝐷 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷) | ||
Theorem | nebi 3023 | Contraposition law for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 28-Dec-2008.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐵 ↔ 𝐶 = 𝐷) ↔ (𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 ↔ 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | pm13.18 3024 | Theorem *13.18 in [WhiteheadRussell] p. 178. (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 3-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 29-Oct-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐵 ∧ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶) → 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | pm13.181 3025 | Theorem *13.181 in [WhiteheadRussell] p. 178. (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 3-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 30-Oct-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | pm13.181OLD 3026 | Obsolete version of pm13.181 3025 as of 30-Oct-2024. (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 3-Jun-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61ine 3027 | Inference eliminating an inequality in an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2007.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | pm2.21ddne 3028 | A contradiction implies anything. Equality/inequality deduction form. (Contributed by David Moews, 28-Feb-2017.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61ne 3029 | Deduction eliminating an inequality in an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 24-May-2006.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61dne 3030 | Deduction eliminating an inequality in an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 1-Jun-2007.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 = 𝐵 → 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61dane 3031 | Deduction eliminating an inequality in an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 30-Nov-2011.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 = 𝐵) → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61da2ne 3032 | Deduction eliminating two inequalities in an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 29-May-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 = 𝐵) → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐶 = 𝐷) → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷)) → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61da3ne 3033 | Deduction eliminating three inequalities in an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jun-2013.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 = 𝐵) → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐶 = 𝐷) → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐸 = 𝐹) → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷 ∧ 𝐸 ≠ 𝐹)) → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61iine 3034 | Equality version of pm2.61ii 183. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 13-Jun-2013.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐷) → 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐶 → 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝐵 = 𝐷 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | neor 3035 | Logical OR with an equality. (Contributed by NM, 29-Apr-2007.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐵 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | neanior 3036 | A De Morgan's law for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-2007.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷) ↔ ¬ (𝐴 = 𝐵 ∨ 𝐶 = 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | ne3anior 3037 | A De Morgan's law for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷 ∧ 𝐸 ≠ 𝐹) ↔ ¬ (𝐴 = 𝐵 ∨ 𝐶 = 𝐷 ∨ 𝐸 = 𝐹)) | ||
Theorem | neorian 3038 | A De Morgan's law for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-2007.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷) ↔ ¬ (𝐴 = 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 = 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | nemtbir 3039 | An inference from an inequality, related to modus tollens. (Contributed by NM, 13-Apr-2007.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | nelne1 3040 | Two classes are different if they don't contain the same element. (Contributed by NM, 3-Feb-2012.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-May-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | nelne2 3041 | Two classes are different if they don't belong to the same class. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jun-2012.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-May-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ ¬ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | nelelne 3042 | Two classes are different if they don't belong to the same class. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 17-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by AV, 10-May-2020.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (𝐶 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝐶 ≠ 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | neneor 3043 | If two classes are different, a third class must be different of at least one of them. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 8-Aug-2020.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 → (𝐴 ≠ 𝐶 ∨ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | nfne 3044 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 10-Nov-2007.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵 | ||
Theorem | nfned 3045 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for inequality. (Contributed by NM, 10-Nov-2007.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | nabbi 3046 | Not equivalent wff's correspond to not equal class abstractions. (Contributed by AV, 7-Apr-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ≠ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓}) | ||
Theorem | mteqand 3047 | A modus tollens deduction for inequality. (Contributed by Steven Nguyen, 1-Jun-2023.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ≠ 𝐷) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 = 𝐵) → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) | ||
Syntax | wnel 3048 | Extend wff notation to include negated membership. |
wff 𝐴 ∉ 𝐵 | ||
Definition | df-nel 3049 | Define negated membership. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∉ 𝐵 ↔ ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | neli 3050 | Inference associated with df-nel 3049. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Jul-2018.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∉ 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 | ||
Theorem | nelir 3051 | Inference associated with df-nel 3049. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Jul-2018.) |
⊢ ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ∉ 𝐵 | ||
Theorem | neleq12d 3052 | Equality theorem for negated membership. (Contributed by FL, 10-Aug-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ∉ 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ∉ 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | neleq1 3053 | Equality theorem for negated membership. (Contributed by NM, 20-Nov-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐴 ∉ 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ∉ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | neleq2 3054 | Equality theorem for negated membership. (Contributed by NM, 20-Nov-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐶 ∉ 𝐴 ↔ 𝐶 ∉ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | nfnel 3055 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for negated membership. (Contributed by David Abernethy, 26-Jun-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝐴 ∉ 𝐵 | ||
Theorem | nfneld 3056 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for negated membership. (Contributed by David Abernethy, 26-Jun-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥 𝐴 ∉ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | nnel 3057 | Negation of negated membership, analogous to nne 2946. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 18-Jan-2018.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Nov-2019.) |
⊢ (¬ 𝐴 ∉ 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | elnelne1 3058 | Two classes are different if they don't contain the same element. (Contributed by AV, 28-Jan-2020.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐴 ∉ 𝐶) → 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | elnelne2 3059 | Two classes are different if they don't belong to the same class. (Contributed by AV, 28-Jan-2020.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∉ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | nelcon3d 3060 | Contrapositive law deduction for negated membership. (Contributed by AV, 28-Jan-2020.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝐷)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶 ∉ 𝐷 → 𝐴 ∉ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | elnelall 3061 | A contradiction concerning membership implies anything. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 25-Jan-2018.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → (𝐴 ∉ 𝐵 → 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | pm2.61danel 3062 | Deduction eliminating an elementhood in an antecedent. (Contributed by AV, 5-Dec-2021.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 ∉ 𝐵) → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
Syntax | wral 3063 | Extend wff notation to include restricted universal quantification. |
wff ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 | ||
Syntax | wrex 3064 | Extend wff notation to include restricted existential quantification. |
wff ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 | ||
Syntax | wreu 3065 | Extend wff notation to include restricted existential uniqueness. |
wff ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 | ||
Syntax | wrmo 3066 | Extend wff notation to include restricted "at most one". |
wff ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 | ||
Syntax | crab 3067 | Extend class notation to include the restricted class abstraction (class builder). |
class {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
Definition | df-ral 3068 |
Define restricted universal quantification. Special case of Definition
4.15(3) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22.
Note: This notation is most often used to express that 𝜑 holds for all elements of a given class 𝐴. For this reading Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 is required, though, for example, asserted when 𝑥 and 𝐴 are disjoint. Should instead 𝐴 depend on 𝑥, you rather focus on those 𝑥 that happen to be contained in the corresponding 𝐴(𝑥). This hardly used interpretation could still occur naturally. For some examples, look at ralndv1 44484 or ralndv2 44485, courtesy of AV. So be careful to either keep 𝐴 independent of 𝑥, or adjust your comments to include such exotic cases. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜑)) | ||
Definition | df-rex 3069 |
Define restricted existential quantification. Special case of Definition
4.15(4) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22.
Note: This notation is most often used to express that 𝜑 holds for at least one element of a given class 𝐴. For this reading Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 is required, though, for example, asserted when 𝑥 and 𝐴 are disjoint. Should instead 𝐴 depend on 𝑥, you rather assert at least one 𝑥 fulfilling 𝜑 happens to be contained in the corresponding 𝐴(𝑥). This interpretation is rarely needed (see also df-ral 3068). (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.) |
⊢ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
Definition | df-reu 3070 |
Define restricted existential uniqueness.
Note: This notation is most often used to express that 𝜑 holds for exactly one element of a given class 𝐴. For this reading Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 is required, though, for example, asserted when 𝑥 and 𝐴 are disjoint. Should instead 𝐴 depend on 𝑥, you rather assert exactly one 𝑥 fulfilling 𝜑 happens to be contained in the corresponding 𝐴(𝑥). This interpretation is rarely needed (see also df-ral 3068). (Contributed by NM, 22-Nov-1994.) |
⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
Definition | df-rmo 3071 |
Define restricted "at most one".
Note: This notation is most often used to express that 𝜑 holds for at most one element of a given class 𝐴. For this reading Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 is required, though, for example, asserted when 𝑥 and 𝐴 are disjoint. Should instead 𝐴 depend on 𝑥, you rather assert at most one 𝑥 fulfilling 𝜑 happens to be contained in the corresponding 𝐴(𝑥). This interpretation is rarely needed (see also df-ral 3068). (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2017.) |
⊢ (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
Definition | df-rab 3072 |
Define a restricted class abstraction (class builder): {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑}
is the class of all sets 𝑥 in 𝐴 such that 𝜑(𝑥) is true.
Definition of [TakeutiZaring] p.
20.
For the interpretation given in the previous paragraph to be correct, we need to assume Ⅎ𝑥𝐴, which is the case as soon as 𝑥 and 𝐴 are disjoint, which is generally the case. If 𝐴 were to depend on 𝑥, then the interpretation would be less obvious (think of the two extreme cases 𝐴 = {𝑥} and 𝐴 = 𝑥, for instance). See also df-ral 3068. (Contributed by NM, 22-Nov-1994.) |
⊢ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)} | ||
Theorem | rgen 3073 | Generalization rule for restricted quantification. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-1994.) |
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | ralel 3074 | All elements of a class are elements of the class. (Contributed by AV, 30-Oct-2020.) |
⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | rgenw 3075 | Generalization rule for restricted quantification. (Contributed by NM, 18-Jun-2014.) |
⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | rgen2w 3076 | Generalization rule for restricted quantification. Note that 𝑥 and 𝑦 needn't be distinct. (Contributed by NM, 18-Jun-2014.) |
⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | mprg 3077 | Modus ponens combined with restricted generalization. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-2004.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜓 | ||
Theorem | mprgbir 3078 | Modus ponens on biconditional combined with restricted generalization. (Contributed by NM, 21-Mar-2004.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
Theorem | alral 3079 | Universal quantification implies restricted quantification. (Contributed by NM, 20-Oct-2006.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | raln 3080 | Restricted universally quantified negation expressed as a universally quantified negation. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jul-2021.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ¬ 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ¬ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | ral2imi 3081 | Inference quantifying antecedent, nested antecedent, and consequent, with a strong hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 19-Dec-2006.) Allow shortening of ralim 3082. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 1-Dec-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | ralim 3082 | Distribution of restricted quantification over implication. (Contributed by NM, 9-Feb-1997.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 1-Dec-2019.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | ralimi2 3083 | Inference quantifying both antecedent and consequent. (Contributed by NM, 22-Feb-2004.) |
⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜑) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ralimia 3084 | Inference quantifying both antecedent and consequent. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jul-1996.) |
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ralimiaa 3085 | Inference quantifying both antecedent and consequent. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2007.) |
⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ralimi 3086 | Inference quantifying both antecedent and consequent, with strong hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 4-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | 2ralimi 3087 | Inference quantifying both antecedent and consequent two times, with strong hypothesis. (Contributed by AV, 3-Dec-2021.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ralbii2 3088 | Inference adding different restricted universal quantifiers to each side of an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 15-Aug-2005.) |
⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ralbiia 3089 | Inference adding restricted universal quantifier to both sides of an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-2000.) |
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ralbii 3090 | Inference adding restricted universal quantifier to both sides of an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-1994.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 17-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Dec-2019.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | 2ralbii 3091 | Inference adding two restricted universal quantifiers to both sides of an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-2004.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | ralbi 3092 | Distribute a restricted universal quantifier over a biconditional. Restricted quantification version of albi 1822. (Contributed by NM, 6-Oct-2003.) Reduce axiom usage. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 17-Jun-2023.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | ralanid 3093 | Cancellation law for restricted universal quantification. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Dec-2018.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 29-Jun-2023.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | r19.26 3094 | Restricted quantifier version of 19.26 1874. (Contributed by NM, 28-Jan-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 30-May-2011.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | r19.26-2 3095 | Restricted quantifier version of 19.26-2 1875. Version of r19.26 3094 with two quantifiers. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-2004.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | r19.26-3 3096 | Version of r19.26 3094 with three quantifiers. (Contributed by FL, 22-Nov-2010.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | r19.26m 3097 | Version of 19.26 1874 and r19.26 3094 with restricted quantifiers ranging over different classes. (Contributed by NM, 22-Feb-2004.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜑) ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝜓)) ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | ralbiim 3098 | Split a biconditional and distribute quantifier. Restricted quantifier version of albiim 1893. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jun-2012.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜓 → 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | 2ralbiim 3099 | Split a biconditional and distribute two restricted universal quantifiers, analogous to 2albiim 1894 and ralbiim 3098. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 2-Jul-2017.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜓 → 𝜑))) | ||
Theorem | r19.21v 3100* | Restricted quantifier version of 19.21v 1943. (Contributed by NM, 15-Oct-2003.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 30-May-2011.) Reduce dependencies on axioms. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 2-Jan-2020.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓)) |
< Previous Next > |
Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |