![]() |
Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 328 of 454) | < Previous Next > |
Bad symbols? Try the
GIF version. |
||
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > MPE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
Color key: | ![]() (1-28701) |
![]() (28702-30224) |
![]() (30225-45333) |
Type | Label | Description |
---|---|---|
Statement | ||
Definition | df-gona 32701 | Define the Godel-set for the Sheffer stroke NAND. Here the arguments 𝑥 = 〈𝑈, 𝑉〉 are also Godel-sets corresponding to smaller formulas. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ ⊼𝑔 = (𝑥 ∈ (V × V) ↦ 〈1o, 𝑥〉) | ||
Definition | df-goal 32702 | Define the Godel-set of universal quantification. Here 𝑁 ∈ ω corresponds to vN , and 𝑈 represents another formula, and this expression is [∀𝑥𝜑] = ∀𝑔𝑁𝑈 where 𝑥 is the 𝑁-th variable, 𝑈 = [𝜑] is the code for 𝜑. Note that this is a class expression, not a wff. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ ∀𝑔𝑁𝑈 = 〈2o, 〈𝑁, 𝑈〉〉 | ||
Definition | df-sat 32703* |
Define the satisfaction predicate. This recursive construction builds up
a function over wff codes (see satff 32770) and simultaneously defines the
set of assignments to all variables from 𝑀 that makes the coded wff
true in the model 𝑀, where ∈ is interpreted as the binary
relation 𝐸 on 𝑀.
The interpretation of the statement 𝑆 ∈ (((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑛)‘𝑈) is that for the model 〈𝑀, 𝐸〉, 𝑆:ω⟶𝑀 is a
valuation of the variables (v0 = (𝑆‘∅), v1 = (𝑆‘1o), etc.) and 𝑈 is a code for a wff using ∈ , ⊼ , ∀ that
is true under the assignment 𝑆. The function is defined by finite
recursion; ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑛) only operates on wffs of depth at
most 𝑛 ∈ ω, and ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘ω) = ∪ 𝑛 ∈ ω((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑛) operates on all wffs.
The coding scheme for the wffs is defined so that
(Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ Sat = (𝑚 ∈ V, 𝑒 ∈ V ↦ (rec((𝑓 ∈ V ↦ (𝑓 ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑓 (∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑓 (𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑚 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑚 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑚 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)}))})), {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω (𝑥 = (𝑖∈𝑔𝑗) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑚 ↑m ω) ∣ (𝑎‘𝑖)𝑒(𝑎‘𝑗)})}) ↾ suc ω)) | ||
Definition | df-sate 32704* | A simplified version of the satisfaction predicate, using the standard membership relation and eliminating the extra variable 𝑛. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ Sat∈ = (𝑚 ∈ V, 𝑢 ∈ V ↦ (((𝑚 Sat ( E ∩ (𝑚 × 𝑚)))‘ω)‘𝑢)) | ||
Definition | df-fmla 32705 | Define the predicate which defines the set of valid Godel formulas. The parameter 𝑛 defines the maximum height of the formulas: the set (Fmla‘∅) is all formulas of the form 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 (which in our coding scheme is the set ({∅} × (ω × ω)); see df-sat 32703 for the full coding scheme), see fmla0 32742, and each extra level adds to the complexity of the formulas in (Fmla‘𝑛), see fmlasuc 32746. Remark: it is sufficient to have atomic formulas of the form 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 only, because equations (formulas of the form 𝑥 = 𝑦), which are required as (atomic) formulas, can be introduced as a defined notion in terms of ∈𝑔, see df-goeq 32804. (Fmla‘ω) = ∪ 𝑛 ∈ ω(Fmla‘𝑛) is the set of all valid formulas, see fmla 32741. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ Fmla = (𝑛 ∈ suc ω ↦ dom ((∅ Sat ∅)‘𝑛)) | ||
Definition | df-prv 32706* | Define the "proves" relation on a set. A wff is true in a model 𝑀 if for every valuation 𝑠 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω), the interpretation of the wff using the membership relation on 𝑀 is true. Since ⊧ is defined in terms of the interpretations making the given formula true, it is not defined on the empty "model" 𝑀 = ∅, since there are no interpretations. In particular, the empty set on the LHS of ⊧ should not be interpreted as the empty model. Statement prv0 32790 shows that our definition yields ∅⊧𝑈 for all formulas, though of course the formula ∃𝑥𝑥 = 𝑥 is not satisfied on the empty model. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ ⊧ = {〈𝑚, 𝑢〉 ∣ (𝑚 Sat∈ 𝑢) = (𝑚 ↑m ω)} | ||
Theorem | goel 32707 | A "Godel-set of membership". The variables are identified by their indices (which are natural numbers), and the membership vi ∈ vj is coded as 〈∅, 〈𝑖, 𝑗〉〉. (Contributed by AV, 15-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝐼 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐽 ∈ ω) → (𝐼∈𝑔𝐽) = 〈∅, 〈𝐼, 𝐽〉〉) | ||
Theorem | goelel3xp 32708 | A "Godel-set of membership" is a member of a doubled Cartesian product. (Contributed by AV, 16-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝐼 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐽 ∈ ω) → (𝐼∈𝑔𝐽) ∈ (ω × (ω × ω))) | ||
Theorem | goeleq12bg 32709 | Two "Godel-set of membership" codes for two variables are equal iff the two corresponding variables are equal. (Contributed by AV, 8-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (((𝑀 ∈ ω ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) ∧ (𝐼 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐽 ∈ ω)) → ((𝐼∈𝑔𝐽) = (𝑀∈𝑔𝑁) ↔ (𝐼 = 𝑀 ∧ 𝐽 = 𝑁))) | ||
Theorem | gonafv 32710 | The "Godel-set for the Sheffer stroke NAND" for two formulas 𝐴 and 𝐵. (Contributed by AV, 16-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴⊼𝑔𝐵) = 〈1o, 〈𝐴, 𝐵〉〉) | ||
Theorem | goaleq12d 32711 | Equality of the "Godel-set of universal quantification". (Contributed by AV, 18-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 = 𝑁) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑔𝑀𝐴 = ∀𝑔𝑁𝐵) | ||
Theorem | gonanegoal 32712 | The Godel-set for the Sheffer stroke NAND is not equal to the Godel-set of universal quantification. (Contributed by AV, 21-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑎⊼𝑔𝑏) ≠ ∀𝑔𝑖𝑢 | ||
Theorem | satf 32713* | The satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the model 𝑀 and the binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) = (rec((𝑓 ∈ V ↦ (𝑓 ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑓 (∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑓 (𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)}))})), {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω (𝑥 = (𝑖∈𝑔𝑗) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (𝑎‘𝑖)𝐸(𝑎‘𝑗)})}) ↾ suc ω)) | ||
Theorem | satfsucom 32714* | The satisfaction predicate for wff codes in the model 𝑀 and the binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀 at an element of the successor of ω. (Contributed by AV, 22-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ suc ω) → ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑁) = (rec((𝑓 ∈ V ↦ (𝑓 ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑓 (∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑓 (𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)}))})), {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω (𝑥 = (𝑖∈𝑔𝑗) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (𝑎‘𝑖)𝐸(𝑎‘𝑗)})})‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | satfn 32715 | The satisfaction predicate for wff codes in the model 𝑀 and the binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀 is a function over suc ω. (Contributed by AV, 6-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) Fn suc ω) | ||
Theorem | satom 32716* | The satisfaction predicate for wff codes in the model 𝑀 and the binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀 at omega (ω). (Contributed by AV, 6-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘ω) = ∪ 𝑛 ∈ ω ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑛)) | ||
Theorem | satfvsucom 32717* | The satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes at a successor of ω. (Contributed by AV, 22-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ suc ω) → (𝑆‘𝑁) = (rec((𝑓 ∈ V ↦ (𝑓 ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑓 (∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑓 (𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)}))})), {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω (𝑥 = (𝑖∈𝑔𝑗) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (𝑎‘𝑖)𝐸(𝑎‘𝑗)})})‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | satfv0 32718* | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes at ∅. (Contributed by AV, 8-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑆‘∅) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω (𝑥 = (𝑖∈𝑔𝑗) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (𝑎‘𝑖)𝐸(𝑎‘𝑗)})}) | ||
Theorem | satfvsuclem1 32719* | Lemma 1 for satfvsuc 32721. (Contributed by AV, 8-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (∃𝑢 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)(∃𝑣 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)})) ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 (𝑀 ↑m ω))} ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | satfvsuclem2 32720* | Lemma 2 for satfvsuc 32721. (Contributed by AV, 8-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)(∃𝑣 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)}))} ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | satfvsuc 32721* | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes at a successor. (Contributed by AV, 10-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → (𝑆‘suc 𝑁) = ((𝑆‘𝑁) ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)(∃𝑣 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)}))})) | ||
Theorem | satfv1lem 32722* | Lemma for satfv1 32723. (Contributed by AV, 9-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐼 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐽 ∈ ω) → {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑁, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑁}))) ∈ {𝑏 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (𝑏‘𝐼)𝐸(𝑏‘𝐽)}} = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 if-(𝐼 = 𝑁, if-(𝐽 = 𝑁, 𝑧𝐸𝑧, 𝑧𝐸(𝑎‘𝐽)), if-(𝐽 = 𝑁, (𝑎‘𝐼)𝐸𝑧, (𝑎‘𝐼)𝐸(𝑎‘𝐽)))}) | ||
Theorem | satfv1 32723* | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes of height 1. (Contributed by AV, 9-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑆‘1o) = ((𝑆‘∅) ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω (∃𝑘 ∈ ω ∃𝑙 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ((𝑖∈𝑔𝑗)⊼𝑔(𝑘∈𝑔𝑙)) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (¬ (𝑎‘𝑖)𝐸(𝑎‘𝑗) ∨ ¬ (𝑎‘𝑘)𝐸(𝑎‘𝑙))}) ∨ ∃𝑛 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑛(𝑖∈𝑔𝑗) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 if-(𝑖 = 𝑛, if-(𝑗 = 𝑛, 𝑧𝐸𝑧, 𝑧𝐸(𝑎‘𝑗)), if-(𝑗 = 𝑛, (𝑎‘𝑖)𝐸𝑧, (𝑎‘𝑖)𝐸(𝑎‘𝑗)))}))})) | ||
Theorem | satfsschain 32724 | The binary relation of a satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes is an increasing chain (with respect to inclusion). (Contributed by AV, 15-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ (𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω)) → (𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴 → (𝑆‘𝐵) ⊆ (𝑆‘𝐴))) | ||
Theorem | satfvsucsuc 32725* | The satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes of height (𝑁 + 1), expressed by the minimally necessary satisfaction predicates as function over wff codes of height 𝑁. (Contributed by AV, 21-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) & ⊢ 𝐴 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣))) & ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)} ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → (𝑆‘suc suc 𝑁) = ((𝑆‘suc 𝑁) ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (∃𝑢 ∈ ((𝑆‘suc 𝑁) ∖ (𝑆‘𝑁))(∃𝑣 ∈ (𝑆‘suc 𝑁)(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐴) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵)) ∨ ∃𝑢 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)∃𝑣 ∈ ((𝑆‘suc 𝑁) ∖ (𝑆‘𝑁))(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐴))})) | ||
Theorem | satfbrsuc 32726* | The binary relation of a satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes at a successor. (Contributed by AV, 13-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (𝑆‘𝑁) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑌)) → (𝐴(𝑆‘suc 𝑁)𝐵 ↔ (𝐴𝑃𝐵 ∨ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑃 (∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑃 (𝐴 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝐵 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝐴 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝐵 = {𝑓 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑓 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)}))))) | ||
Theorem | satfrel 32727 | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes at a natural number is a relation. (Contributed by AV, 12-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → Rel ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | satfdmlem 32728* | Lemma for satfdm 32729. (Contributed by AV, 12-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ ω) ∧ dom ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑌) = dom ((𝑁 Sat 𝐹)‘𝑌)) → (∃𝑢 ∈ ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑌)(∃𝑣 ∈ ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑌)𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢)) → ∃𝑎 ∈ ((𝑁 Sat 𝐹)‘𝑌)(∃𝑏 ∈ ((𝑁 Sat 𝐹)‘𝑌)𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑎)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑏)) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑎)))) | ||
Theorem | satfdm 32729* | The domain of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes does not depend on the model 𝑀 and the binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀. (Contributed by AV, 13-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ (𝑁 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ 𝑌)) → ∀𝑛 ∈ ω dom ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑛) = dom ((𝑁 Sat 𝐹)‘𝑛)) | ||
Theorem | satfrnmapom 32730 | The range of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in any model 𝑀 and any binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀 for a natural number 𝑁 is a subset of the power set of all mappings from the natural numbers into the model 𝑀. (Contributed by AV, 13-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → ran ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑁) ⊆ 𝒫 (𝑀 ↑m ω)) | ||
Theorem | satfv0fun 32731 | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes at ∅ is a function. (Contributed by AV, 15-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → Fun ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘∅)) | ||
Theorem | satf0 32732* | The satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the empty model with an empty binary relation. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (∅ Sat ∅) = (rec((𝑓 ∈ V ↦ (𝑓 ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑦 = ∅ ∧ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑓 (∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑓 𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢)))})), {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑦 = ∅ ∧ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω 𝑥 = (𝑖∈𝑔𝑗))}) ↾ suc ω) | ||
Theorem | satf0sucom 32733* | The satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the empty model with an empty binary relation at a successor of ω. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ suc ω → ((∅ Sat ∅)‘𝑁) = (rec((𝑓 ∈ V ↦ (𝑓 ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑦 = ∅ ∧ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑓 (∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑓 𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢)))})), {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑦 = ∅ ∧ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω 𝑥 = (𝑖∈𝑔𝑗))})‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | satf00 32734* | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the empty model with an empty binary relation at ∅. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ ((∅ Sat ∅)‘∅) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑦 = ∅ ∧ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω 𝑥 = (𝑖∈𝑔𝑗))} | ||
Theorem | satf0suclem 32735* | Lemma for satf0suc 32736, sat1el2xp 32739 and fmlasuc0 32744. (Contributed by AV, 19-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑋 ∈ 𝑈 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑍 ∈ 𝑊) → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑦 = ∅ ∧ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑋 (∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑌 𝑥 = 𝐵 ∨ ∃𝑤 ∈ 𝑍 𝑥 = 𝐶))} ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | satf0suc 32736* | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the empty model and the empty binary relation at a successor. (Contributed by AV, 19-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (∅ Sat ∅) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → (𝑆‘suc 𝑁) = ((𝑆‘𝑁) ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑦 = ∅ ∧ ∃𝑢 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)(∃𝑣 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢)))})) | ||
Theorem | satf0op 32737* | An element of a value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the empty model and the empty binary relation expressed as ordered pair. (Contributed by AV, 19-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (∅ Sat ∅) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → (𝑋 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁) ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑋 = 〈𝑥, ∅〉 ∧ 〈𝑥, ∅〉 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)))) | ||
Theorem | satf0n0 32738 | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the empty model and the empty binary relation does not contain the empty set. (Contributed by AV, 19-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → ∅ ∉ ((∅ Sat ∅)‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | sat1el2xp 32739* | The first component of an element of the value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the empty model with an empty binary relation is a member of a doubled Cartesian product. (Contributed by AV, 17-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → ∀𝑤 ∈ ((∅ Sat ∅)‘𝑁)∃𝑎∃𝑏(1st ‘𝑤) ∈ (ω × (𝑎 × 𝑏))) | ||
Theorem | fmlafv 32740 | The valid Godel formulas of height 𝑁 is the domain of the value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the empty model with an empty binary relation at 𝑁. (Contributed by AV, 15-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ suc ω → (Fmla‘𝑁) = dom ((∅ Sat ∅)‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | fmla 32741 | The set of all valid Godel formulas. (Contributed by AV, 20-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (Fmla‘ω) = ∪ 𝑛 ∈ ω (Fmla‘𝑛) | ||
Theorem | fmla0 32742* | The valid Godel formulas of height 0 is the set of all formulas of the form vi ∈ vj ("Godel-set of membership") coded as 〈∅, 〈𝑖, 𝑗〉〉. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (Fmla‘∅) = {𝑥 ∈ V ∣ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω 𝑥 = (𝑖∈𝑔𝑗)} | ||
Theorem | fmla0xp 32743 | The valid Godel formulas of height 0 is the set of all formulas of the form vi ∈ vj ("Godel-set of membership") coded as 〈∅, 〈𝑖, 𝑗〉〉. (Contributed by AV, 15-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (Fmla‘∅) = ({∅} × (ω × ω)) | ||
Theorem | fmlasuc0 32744* | The valid Godel formulas of height (𝑁 + 1). (Contributed by AV, 18-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → (Fmla‘suc 𝑁) = ((Fmla‘𝑁) ∪ {𝑥 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ ((∅ Sat ∅)‘𝑁)(∃𝑣 ∈ ((∅ Sat ∅)‘𝑁)𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢))})) | ||
Theorem | fmlafvel 32745 | A class is a valid Godel formula of height 𝑁 iff it is the first component of a member of the value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the empty model with an empty binary relation at 𝑁. (Contributed by AV, 19-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → (𝐹 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁) ↔ 〈𝐹, ∅〉 ∈ ((∅ Sat ∅)‘𝑁))) | ||
Theorem | fmlasuc 32746* | The valid Godel formulas of height (𝑁 + 1), expressed by the valid Godel formulas of height 𝑁. (Contributed by AV, 20-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → (Fmla‘suc 𝑁) = ((Fmla‘𝑁) ∪ {𝑥 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁)(∃𝑣 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁)𝑥 = (𝑢⊼𝑔𝑣) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖𝑢)})) | ||
Theorem | fmla1 32747* | The valid Godel formulas of height 1 is the set of all formulas of the form (𝑎⊼𝑔𝑏) and ∀𝑔𝑘𝑎 with atoms 𝑎, 𝑏 of the form 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦. (Contributed by AV, 20-Sep-2023.) |
⊢ (Fmla‘1o) = (({∅} × (ω × ω)) ∪ {𝑥 ∣ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω ∃𝑗 ∈ ω ∃𝑘 ∈ ω (∃𝑙 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ((𝑖∈𝑔𝑗)⊼𝑔(𝑘∈𝑔𝑙)) ∨ 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑘(𝑖∈𝑔𝑗))}) | ||
Theorem | isfmlasuc 32748* | The characterization of a Godel formula of height at least 1. (Contributed by AV, 14-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐹 ∈ 𝑉) → (𝐹 ∈ (Fmla‘suc 𝑁) ↔ (𝐹 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁) ∨ ∃𝑢 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁)(∃𝑣 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁)𝐹 = (𝑢⊼𝑔𝑣) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝐹 = ∀𝑔𝑖𝑢)))) | ||
Theorem | fmlasssuc 32749 | The Godel formulas of height 𝑁 are a subset of the Godel formulas of height 𝑁 + 1. (Contributed by AV, 20-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → (Fmla‘𝑁) ⊆ (Fmla‘suc 𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | fmlaomn0 32750 | The empty set is not a Godel formula of any height. (Contributed by AV, 21-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → ∅ ∉ (Fmla‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | fmlan0 32751 | The empty set is not a Godel formula. (Contributed by AV, 19-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ ∅ ∉ (Fmla‘ω) | ||
Theorem | gonan0 32752 | The "Godel-set of NAND" is a Godel formula of at least height 1. (Contributed by AV, 21-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝐴⊼𝑔𝐵) ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁) → 𝑁 ≠ ∅) | ||
Theorem | goaln0 32753* | The "Godel-set of universal quantification" is a Godel formula of at least height 1. (Contributed by AV, 22-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (∀𝑔𝑖𝐴 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁) → 𝑁 ≠ ∅) | ||
Theorem | gonarlem 32754* | Lemma for gonar 32755 (induction step). (Contributed by AV, 21-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → (((𝑎⊼𝑔𝑏) ∈ (Fmla‘suc 𝑁) → (𝑎 ∈ (Fmla‘suc 𝑁) ∧ 𝑏 ∈ (Fmla‘suc 𝑁))) → ((𝑎⊼𝑔𝑏) ∈ (Fmla‘suc suc 𝑁) → (𝑎 ∈ (Fmla‘suc suc 𝑁) ∧ 𝑏 ∈ (Fmla‘suc suc 𝑁))))) | ||
Theorem | gonar 32755* | If the "Godel-set of NAND" applied to classes is a Godel formula, the classes are also Godel formulas. Remark: The reverse is not valid for 𝐴 or 𝐵 being of the same height as the "Godel-set of NAND". (Contributed by AV, 21-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ (𝑎⊼𝑔𝑏) ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁)) → (𝑎 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁) ∧ 𝑏 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁))) | ||
Theorem | goalrlem 32756* | Lemma for goalr 32757 (induction step). (Contributed by AV, 22-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → ((∀𝑔𝑖𝑎 ∈ (Fmla‘suc 𝑁) → 𝑎 ∈ (Fmla‘suc 𝑁)) → (∀𝑔𝑖𝑎 ∈ (Fmla‘suc suc 𝑁) → 𝑎 ∈ (Fmla‘suc suc 𝑁)))) | ||
Theorem | goalr 32757* | If the "Godel-set of universal quantification" applied to a class is a Godel formula, the class is also a Godel formula. Remark: The reverse is not valid for 𝐴 being of the same height as the "Godel-set of universal quantification". (Contributed by AV, 22-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ ∀𝑔𝑖𝑎 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁)) → 𝑎 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | fmla0disjsuc 32758* | The set of valid Godel formulas of height 0 is disjoint with the formulas constructed from Godel-sets for the Sheffer stroke NAND and Godel-set of universal quantification. (Contributed by AV, 20-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((Fmla‘∅) ∩ {𝑥 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ (Fmla‘∅)(∃𝑣 ∈ (Fmla‘∅)𝑥 = (𝑢⊼𝑔𝑣) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖𝑢)}) = ∅ | ||
Theorem | fmlasucdisj 32759* | The valid Godel formulas of height (𝑁 + 1) is disjoint with the difference ((Fmla‘suc suc 𝑁) ∖ (Fmla‘suc 𝑁)), expressed by formulas constructed from Godel-sets for the Sheffer stroke NAND and Godel-set of universal quantification based on the valid Godel formulas of height (𝑁 + 1). (Contributed by AV, 20-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → ((Fmla‘suc 𝑁) ∩ {𝑥 ∣ (∃𝑢 ∈ ((Fmla‘suc 𝑁) ∖ (Fmla‘𝑁))(∃𝑣 ∈ (Fmla‘suc 𝑁)𝑥 = (𝑢⊼𝑔𝑣) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω 𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖𝑢) ∨ ∃𝑢 ∈ (Fmla‘𝑁)∃𝑣 ∈ ((Fmla‘suc 𝑁) ∖ (Fmla‘𝑁))𝑥 = (𝑢⊼𝑔𝑣))}) = ∅) | ||
Theorem | satfdmfmla 32760 | The domain of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in any model 𝑀 and any binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀 for a natural number 𝑁 is the set of valid Godel formulas of height 𝑁. (Contributed by AV, 13-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → dom ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑁) = (Fmla‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | satffunlem 32761 | Lemma for satffunlem1lem1 32762 and satffunlem2lem1 32764. (Contributed by AV, 27-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (((Fun 𝑍 ∧ (𝑠 ∈ 𝑍 ∧ 𝑟 ∈ 𝑍) ∧ (𝑢 ∈ 𝑍 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑍)) ∧ (𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑠)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑟)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑠) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑟)))) ∧ (𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑤 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣))))) → 𝑦 = 𝑤) | ||
Theorem | satffunlem1lem1 32762* | Lemma for satffunlem1 32767. (Contributed by AV, 17-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (Fun ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑁) → Fun {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑁)(∃𝑣 ∈ ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑁)(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑓 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑘 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑘〉} ∪ (𝑓 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)}))}) | ||
Theorem | satffunlem1lem2 32763* | Lemma 2 for satffunlem1 32767. (Contributed by AV, 23-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → (dom ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘∅) ∩ dom {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑢 ∈ ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘∅)(∃𝑣 ∈ ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘∅)(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣)))) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑓 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑗 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑗〉} ∪ (𝑓 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)}))}) = ∅) | ||
Theorem | satffunlem2lem1 32764* | Lemma 1 for satffunlem2 32768. (Contributed by AV, 28-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) & ⊢ 𝐴 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣))) & ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)} ⇒ ⊢ ((Fun (𝑆‘suc 𝑁) ∧ (𝑆‘𝑁) ⊆ (𝑆‘suc 𝑁)) → Fun {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (∃𝑢 ∈ ((𝑆‘suc 𝑁) ∖ (𝑆‘𝑁))(∃𝑣 ∈ (𝑆‘suc 𝑁)(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐴) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵)) ∨ ∃𝑢 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)∃𝑣 ∈ ((𝑆‘suc 𝑁) ∖ (𝑆‘𝑁))(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐴))}) | ||
Theorem | dmopab3rexdif 32765* | The domain of an ordered pair class abstraction with three nested restricted existential quantifiers with differences. (Contributed by AV, 25-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((∀𝑢 ∈ 𝑈 (∀𝑣 ∈ 𝑈 𝐵 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ ∀𝑖 ∈ 𝐼 𝐷 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ 𝑆 ⊆ 𝑈) → dom {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (∃𝑢 ∈ (𝑈 ∖ 𝑆)(∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑈 (𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ 𝐼 (𝑥 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐷)) ∨ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑆 ∃𝑣 ∈ (𝑈 ∖ 𝑆)(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵))} = {𝑥 ∣ (∃𝑢 ∈ (𝑈 ∖ 𝑆)(∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑈 𝑥 = 𝐴 ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ 𝐼 𝑥 = 𝐶) ∨ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝑆 ∃𝑣 ∈ (𝑈 ∖ 𝑆)𝑥 = 𝐴)}) | ||
Theorem | satffunlem2lem2 32766* | Lemma 2 for satffunlem2 32768. (Contributed by AV, 27-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) & ⊢ 𝐴 = ((𝑀 ↑m ω) ∖ ((2nd ‘𝑢) ∩ (2nd ‘𝑣))) & ⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑀 ({〈𝑖, 𝑧〉} ∪ (𝑎 ↾ (ω ∖ {𝑖}))) ∈ (2nd ‘𝑢)} ⇒ ⊢ (((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ (𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊)) ∧ Fun (𝑆‘suc 𝑁)) → (dom (𝑆‘suc 𝑁) ∩ dom {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (∃𝑢 ∈ ((𝑆‘suc 𝑁) ∖ (𝑆‘𝑁))(∃𝑣 ∈ (𝑆‘suc 𝑁)(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐴) ∨ ∃𝑖 ∈ ω (𝑥 = ∀𝑔𝑖(1st ‘𝑢) ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵)) ∨ ∃𝑢 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑁)∃𝑣 ∈ ((𝑆‘suc 𝑁) ∖ (𝑆‘𝑁))(𝑥 = ((1st ‘𝑢)⊼𝑔(1st ‘𝑣)) ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐴))}) = ∅) | ||
Theorem | satffunlem1 32767 | Lemma 1 for satffun 32769: induction basis. (Contributed by AV, 28-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → Fun ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘suc ∅)) | ||
Theorem | satffunlem2 32768 | Lemma 2 for satffun 32769: induction step. (Contributed by AV, 28-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ (𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊)) → (Fun ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘suc 𝑁) → Fun ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘suc suc 𝑁))) | ||
Theorem | satffun 32769 | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes at a natural number is a function. (Contributed by AV, 28-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → Fun ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑁)) | ||
Theorem | satff 32770 | The satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the model 𝑀 and the binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀. (Contributed by AV, 28-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ ω) → ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘𝑁):(Fmla‘𝑁)⟶𝒫 (𝑀 ↑m ω)) | ||
Theorem | satfun 32771 | The satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the model 𝑀 and the binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀. (Contributed by AV, 29-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘ω):(Fmla‘ω)⟶𝒫 (𝑀 ↑m ω)) | ||
Theorem | satfvel 32772 | An element of the value of the satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the model 𝑀 and the binary relation 𝐸 on 𝑀 at the code 𝑈 for a wff using ∈ , ⊼ , ∀ is a valuation 𝑆:ω⟶𝑀 of the variables (v0 = (𝑆‘∅), v1 = (𝑆‘1o), etc.) so that 𝑈 is true under the assignment 𝑆. (Contributed by AV, 29-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ 𝑈 ∈ (Fmla‘ω) ∧ 𝑆 ∈ (((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘ω)‘𝑈)) → 𝑆:ω⟶𝑀) | ||
Theorem | satfv0fvfmla0 32773* | The value of the satisfaction predicate as function over a wff code at ∅. (Contributed by AV, 2-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑀 Sat 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝑋 ∈ (Fmla‘∅)) → ((𝑆‘∅)‘𝑋) = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (𝑎‘(1st ‘(2nd ‘𝑋)))𝐸(𝑎‘(2nd ‘(2nd ‘𝑋)))}) | ||
Theorem | satefv 32774 | The simplified satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes in the model 𝑀 at the code 𝑈. (Contributed by AV, 30-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑈 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑀 Sat∈ 𝑈) = (((𝑀 Sat ( E ∩ (𝑀 × 𝑀)))‘ω)‘𝑈)) | ||
Theorem | sate0 32775 | The simplified satisfaction predicate for any wff code over an empty model. (Contributed by AV, 6-Oct-2023.) (Revised by AV, 5-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑈 ∈ 𝑉 → (∅ Sat∈ 𝑈) = (((∅ Sat ∅)‘ω)‘𝑈)) | ||
Theorem | satef 32776 | The simplified satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes over an empty model. (Contributed by AV, 30-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑈 ∈ (Fmla‘ω) ∧ 𝑆 ∈ (𝑀 Sat∈ 𝑈)) → 𝑆:ω⟶𝑀) | ||
Theorem | sate0fv0 32777 | A simplified satisfaction predicate as function over wff codes over an empty model is an empty set. (Contributed by AV, 31-Oct-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑈 ∈ (Fmla‘ω) → (𝑆 ∈ (∅ Sat∈ 𝑈) → 𝑆 = ∅)) | ||
Theorem | satefvfmla0 32778* | The simplified satisfaction predicate for wff codes of height 0. (Contributed by AV, 4-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑋 ∈ (Fmla‘∅)) → (𝑀 Sat∈ 𝑋) = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (𝑎‘(1st ‘(2nd ‘𝑋))) ∈ (𝑎‘(2nd ‘(2nd ‘𝑋)))}) | ||
Theorem | sategoelfvb 32779 | Characterization of a valuation 𝑆 of a simplified satisfaction predicate for a Godel-set of membership. (Contributed by AV, 5-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝐸 = (𝑀 Sat∈ (𝐴∈𝑔𝐵)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ (𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω)) → (𝑆 ∈ 𝐸 ↔ (𝑆 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∧ (𝑆‘𝐴) ∈ (𝑆‘𝐵)))) | ||
Theorem | sategoelfv 32780 | Condition of a valuation 𝑆 of a simplified satisfaction predicate for a Godel-set of membership: The sets in model 𝑀 corresponding to the variables 𝐴 and 𝐵 under the assignment of 𝑆 are in a membership relation in 𝑀. (Contributed by AV, 5-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝐸 = (𝑀 Sat∈ (𝐴∈𝑔𝐵)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ (𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω) ∧ 𝑆 ∈ 𝐸) → (𝑆‘𝐴) ∈ (𝑆‘𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | ex-sategoelel 32781* | Example of a valuation of a simplified satisfaction predicate for a Godel-set of membership. (Contributed by AV, 5-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝐸 = (𝑀 Sat∈ (𝐴∈𝑔𝐵)) & ⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑥 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑥 = 𝐴, 𝑍, if(𝑥 = 𝐵, 𝒫 𝑍, ∅))) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝑀 ∈ WUni ∧ 𝑍 ∈ 𝑀) ∧ (𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵)) → 𝑆 ∈ 𝐸) | ||
Theorem | ex-sategoel 32782* | Instance of sategoelfv 32780 for the example of a valuation of a simplified satisfaction predicate for a Godel-set of membership. (Contributed by AV, 5-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝐸 = (𝑀 Sat∈ (𝐴∈𝑔𝐵)) & ⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑥 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑥 = 𝐴, 𝑍, if(𝑥 = 𝐵, 𝒫 𝑍, ∅))) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝑀 ∈ WUni ∧ 𝑍 ∈ 𝑀) ∧ (𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵)) → (𝑆‘𝐴) ∈ (𝑆‘𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | satfv1fvfmla1 32783* | The value of the satisfaction predicate at two Godel-sets of membership combined with a Godel-set for NAND. (Contributed by AV, 17-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑋 = ((𝐼∈𝑔𝐽)⊼𝑔(𝐾∈𝑔𝐿)) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ (𝐼 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐽 ∈ ω) ∧ (𝐾 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐿 ∈ ω)) → (((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘1o)‘𝑋) = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (¬ (𝑎‘𝐼)𝐸(𝑎‘𝐽) ∨ ¬ (𝑎‘𝐾)𝐸(𝑎‘𝐿))}) | ||
Theorem | 2goelgoanfmla1 32784 | Two Godel-sets of membership combined with a Godel-set for NAND is a Godel formula of height 1. (Contributed by AV, 17-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑋 = ((𝐼∈𝑔𝐽)⊼𝑔(𝐾∈𝑔𝐿)) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝐼 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐽 ∈ ω) ∧ (𝐾 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐿 ∈ ω)) → 𝑋 ∈ (Fmla‘1o)) | ||
Theorem | satefvfmla1 32785* | The simplified satisfaction predicate at two Godel-sets of membership combined with a Godel-set for NAND. (Contributed by AV, 17-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑋 = ((𝐼∈𝑔𝐽)⊼𝑔(𝐾∈𝑔𝐿)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ (𝐼 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐽 ∈ ω) ∧ (𝐾 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐿 ∈ ω)) → (𝑀 Sat∈ 𝑋) = {𝑎 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω) ∣ (¬ (𝑎‘𝐼) ∈ (𝑎‘𝐽) ∨ ¬ (𝑎‘𝐾) ∈ (𝑎‘𝐿))}) | ||
Theorem | ex-sategoelelomsuc 32786* | Example of a valuation of a simplified satisfaction predicate over the ordinal numbers as model for a Godel-set of membership using the properties of a successor: (𝑆‘2o) = 𝑍 ∈ suc 𝑍 = (𝑆‘2o). Remark: the indices 1o and 2o are intentionally reversed to distinguish them from elements of the model: (2o∈𝑔1o) should not be confused with 2o ∈ 1o, which is false. (Contributed by AV, 19-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑥 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑥 = 2o, 𝑍, suc 𝑍)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑍 ∈ ω → 𝑆 ∈ (ω Sat∈ (2o∈𝑔1o))) | ||
Theorem | ex-sategoelel12 32787 | Example of a valuation of a simplified satisfaction predicate over a proper pair (of ordinal numbers) as model for a Godel-set of membership using the properties of a successor: (𝑆‘2o) = 1o ∈ 2o = (𝑆‘2o). Remark: the indices 1o and 2o are intentionally reversed to distinguish them from elements of the model: (2o∈𝑔1o) should not be confused with 2o ∈ 1o, which is false. (Contributed by AV, 19-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = (𝑥 ∈ ω ↦ if(𝑥 = 2o, 1o, 2o)) ⇒ ⊢ 𝑆 ∈ ({1o, 2o} Sat∈ (2o∈𝑔1o)) | ||
Theorem | prv 32788 | The "proves" relation on a set. A wff encoded as 𝑈 is true in a model 𝑀 iff for every valuation 𝑠 ∈ (𝑀 ↑m ω), the interpretation of the wff using the membership relation on 𝑀 is true. (Contributed by AV, 5-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑈 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑀⊧𝑈 ↔ (𝑀 Sat∈ 𝑈) = (𝑀 ↑m ω))) | ||
Theorem | elnanelprv 32789 | The wff (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ⊼ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) encoded as ((𝐴∈𝑔𝐵) ⊼𝑔(𝐵∈𝑔𝐴)) is true in any model 𝑀. This is the model theoretic proof of elnanel 9054. (Contributed by AV, 5-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω) → 𝑀⊧((𝐴∈𝑔𝐵)⊼𝑔(𝐵∈𝑔𝐴))) | ||
Theorem | prv0 32790 | Every wff encoded as 𝑈 is true in an "empty model" (𝑀 = ∅). Since ⊧ is defined in terms of the interpretations making the given formula true, it is not defined on the "empty model", since there are no interpretations. In particular, the empty set on the LHS of ⊧ should not be interpreted as the empty model, because ∃𝑥𝑥 = 𝑥 is not satisfied on the empty model. (Contributed by AV, 19-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ (𝑈 ∈ (Fmla‘ω) → ∅⊧𝑈) | ||
Theorem | prv1n 32791 | No wff encoded as a Godel-set of membership is true in a model with only one element. (Contributed by AV, 19-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝐼 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐽 ∈ ω ∧ 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉) → ¬ {𝑋}⊧(𝐼∈𝑔𝐽)) | ||
Syntax | cgon 32792 | The Godel-set of negation. (Note that this is not a wff.) |
class ¬𝑔𝑈 | ||
Syntax | cgoa 32793 | The Godel-set of conjunction. |
class ∧𝑔 | ||
Syntax | cgoi 32794 | The Godel-set of implication. |
class →𝑔 | ||
Syntax | cgoo 32795 | The Godel-set of disjunction. |
class ∨𝑔 | ||
Syntax | cgob 32796 | The Godel-set of equivalence. |
class ↔𝑔 | ||
Syntax | cgoq 32797 | The Godel-set of equality. |
class =𝑔 | ||
Syntax | cgox 32798 | The Godel-set of existential quantification. (Note that this is not a wff.) |
class ∃𝑔𝑁𝑈 | ||
Definition | df-gonot 32799 | Define the Godel-set of negation. Here the argument 𝑈 is also a Godel-set corresponding to smaller formulas. Note that this is a class expression, not a wff. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ ¬𝑔𝑈 = (𝑈⊼𝑔𝑈) | ||
Definition | df-goan 32800* | Define the Godel-set of conjunction. Here the arguments 𝑈 and 𝑉 are also Godel-sets corresponding to smaller formulas. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.) |
⊢ ∧𝑔 = (𝑢 ∈ V, 𝑣 ∈ V ↦ ¬𝑔(𝑢⊼𝑔𝑣)) |
< Previous Next > |
Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |