P. 350 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 34901-35000   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
20.21.8  Converse reflexivity
Definition	df-cnvrefs 34901	Define the class of all converse reflexive sets, cf. the comment of df-ssr 34876. It is used only by df-cnvrefrels 34902. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Jul-2019.)
⊢ CnvRefs = {𝑥 ∣ ( I ∩ (dom 𝑥 × ran 𝑥))◡ S (𝑥 ∩ (dom 𝑥 × ran 𝑥))}
Definition	df-cnvrefrels 34902	Define the class of converse reflexive relations. This is practically dfcnvrefrels2 34904 (which uses the traditional subclass relation ⊆) : we use converse subset relation (brcnvssr 34884) here to ensure the comparability to the definitions of the classes of all reflexive (df-ref 21717), symmetric (df-syms 34916) and transitive (df-trs 34946) sets. We use this concept to define functions ( ~? df-funsALTV , ~? df-funALTV ) and disjoints ( ~? df-disjs , ~? df-disjALTV ). For sets, being an element of the class of converse reflexive relations is equivalent to satisfying the converse reflexive relation predicate, cf. elcnvrefrelsrel 34910. Alternate definitions are dfcnvrefrels2 34904 and dfcnvrefrels3 34905. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 7-Jul-2019.)
⊢ CnvRefRels = ( CnvRefs ∩ Rels )
Definition	df-cnvrefrel 34903	Define the converse reflexive relation predicate (read: 𝑅 is a converse reflexive relation), cf. the comment of dfcnvrefrel3 34907. Alternate definitions are dfcnvrefrel2 34906 and dfcnvrefrel3 34907. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 16-Jul-2021.)
⊢ ( CnvRefRel 𝑅 ↔ ((𝑅 ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ⊆ ( I ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	dfcnvrefrels2 34904	Alternate definition of the class of converse reflexive relations. Cf. the comment of dfrefrels2 34891. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 21-Jul-2021.)
⊢ CnvRefRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ 𝑟 ⊆ ( I ∩ (dom 𝑟 × ran 𝑟))}
Theorem	dfcnvrefrels3 34905*	Alternate definition of the class of converse reflexive relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Jul-2019.)
⊢ CnvRefRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑟∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝑟(𝑥𝑟𝑦 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)}
Theorem	dfcnvrefrel2 34906	Alternate definition of the converse reflexive relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Jul-2019.)
⊢ ( CnvRefRel 𝑅 ↔ (𝑅 ⊆ ( I ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	dfcnvrefrel3 34907*	Alternate definition of the converse reflexive relation predicate. A relation is converse reflexive iff: for all elements on its domain and range, if for an element of its domain and for an element of its range there is the relation between them, then the two elements are the same, cf. the comment of dfrefrel3 34894. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Jul-2021.)
⊢ ( CnvRefRel 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝑅(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	elcnvrefrels2 34908	Element of the class of converse reflexive relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ↔ (𝑅 ⊆ ( I ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elcnvrefrels3 34909*	Element of the class of converse reflexive relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝑅(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elcnvrefrelsrel 34910	For sets, being an element of the class of converse reflexive relations (df-cnvrefrels 34902) is equivalent to satisfying the converse reflexive relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ↔ CnvRefRel 𝑅))
Theorem	cnvrefrelcoss2 34911	Necessary and sufficient condition for a coset relation to be a converse reflexive relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-Jul-2021.)
⊢ ( CnvRefRel ≀ 𝑅 ↔ ≀ 𝑅 ⊆ I )
Theorem	cosselcnvrefrels2 34912	Necessary and sufficient condition for a coset relation to be an element of the converse reflexive relation class. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ( ≀ 𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ↔ ( ≀ 𝑅 ⊆ I ∧ ≀ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	cosselcnvrefrels3 34913*	Necessary and sufficient condition for a coset relation to be an element of the converse reflexive relation class. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ( ≀ 𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ↔ (∀𝑢∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ 𝑢𝑅𝑦) → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ∧ ≀ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	cosselcnvrefrels4 34914*	Necessary and sufficient condition for a coset relation to be an element of the converse reflexive relation class. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ( ≀ 𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ↔ (∀𝑢∃*𝑥 𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ ≀ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	cosselcnvrefrels5 34915*	Necessary and sufficient condition for a coset relation to be an element of the converse reflexive relation class. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.)
⊢ ( ≀ 𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ ran 𝑅∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝑅(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ([𝑥]◡𝑅 ∩ [𝑦]◡𝑅) = ∅) ∧ ≀ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
20.21.9  Symmetry
Definition	df-syms 34916	Define the class of all symmetric sets. It is used only by df-symrels 34917. Note the similarity of the definitions df-refs 34888, df-syms 34916 and df-trs 34946, cf. the comment of dfrefrels2 34891. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Jul-2019.)
⊢ Syms = {𝑥 ∣ ◡(𝑥 ∩ (dom 𝑥 × ran 𝑥)) S (𝑥 ∩ (dom 𝑥 × ran 𝑥))}
Definition	df-symrels 34917	Define the class of symmetric relations. For sets, being an element of the class of symmetric relations is equivalent to satisfying the symmetric relation predicate, cf. elsymrelsrel 34931. Alternate definitions are dfsymrels2 34919, dfsymrels3 34920, dfsymrels4 34921 and dfsymrels5 34922. This definition is similar to the definitions of the classes of reflexive (df-refrels 34889) and transitive (df-trrels 34947) relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 7-Jul-2019.)
⊢ SymRels = ( Syms ∩ Rels )
Definition	df-symrel 34918	Define the symmetric relation predicate. (Read: 𝑅 is a symmetric relation.) For sets, being an element of the class of symmetric relations (df-symrels 34917) is equivalent to satisfying the symmetric relation predicate, cf. elsymrelsrel 34931. Alternate definitions are dfsymrel2 34923 and dfsymrel3 34924. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 16-Jul-2021.)
⊢ ( SymRel 𝑅 ↔ (◡(𝑅 ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ⊆ (𝑅 ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	dfsymrels2 34919	Alternate definition of the class of symmetric relations. Cf. the comment of dfrefrels2 34891. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 20-Jul-2019.)
⊢ SymRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ◡𝑟 ⊆ 𝑟}
Theorem	dfsymrels3 34920*	Alternate definition of the class of symmetric relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Jul-2021.)
⊢ SymRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑟𝑦 → 𝑦𝑟𝑥)}
Theorem	dfsymrels4 34921	Alternate definition of the class of symmetric relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 20-Jul-2019.)
⊢ SymRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ◡𝑟 = 𝑟}
Theorem	dfsymrels5 34922*	Alternate definition of the class of symmetric relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Jul-2021.)
⊢ SymRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑟𝑦 ↔ 𝑦𝑟𝑥)}
Theorem	dfsymrel2 34923	Alternate definition of the symmetric relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Apr-2019.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 17-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ( SymRel 𝑅 ↔ (◡𝑅 ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	dfsymrel3 34924*	Alternate definition of the symmetric relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 21-Apr-2019.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 17-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ( SymRel 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝑦𝑅𝑥) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	dfsymrel4 34925	Alternate definition of the symmetric relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ( SymRel 𝑅 ↔ (◡𝑅 = 𝑅 ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	dfsymrel5 34926*	Alternate definition of the symmetric relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ( SymRel 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 ↔ 𝑦𝑅𝑥) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	elsymrels2 34927	Element of the class of symmetric relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ SymRels ↔ (◡𝑅 ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elsymrels3 34928*	Element of the class of symmetric relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ SymRels ↔ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝑦𝑅𝑥) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elsymrels4 34929	Element of the class of symmetric relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ SymRels ↔ (◡𝑅 = 𝑅 ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elsymrels5 34930*	Element of the class of symmetric relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ SymRels ↔ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 ↔ 𝑦𝑅𝑥) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elsymrelsrel 34931	For sets, being an element of the class of symmetric relations (df-symrels 34917) is equivalent to satisfying the symmetric relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ∈ SymRels ↔ SymRel 𝑅))
Theorem	symreleq 34932	Equality theorem for symmetric relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 15-Apr-2019.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 23-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → ( SymRel 𝑅 ↔ SymRel 𝑆))
Theorem	symrelim 34933	Symmetric relation implies that the domain and the range are equal. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.)
⊢ ( SymRel 𝑅 → dom 𝑅 = ran 𝑅)
Theorem	symrelcoss 34934	The class of cosets by 𝑅 is symmetric. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 20-Dec-2021.)
⊢ SymRel ≀ 𝑅
Theorem	idsymrel 34935	The identity relation is symmetric. (Contributed by AV, 19-Jun-2022.)
⊢ SymRel I
Theorem	epnsymrel 34936	The membership (epsilon) relation is not symmetric. (Contributed by AV, 18-Jun-2022.)
⊢ ¬ SymRel E
20.21.10  Reflexivity and symmetry
Theorem	symrefref2 34937	Symmetry is a sufficient condition for the equivalence of two versions of the reflexive relation, cf. symrefref3 34938. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Jul-2018.)
⊢ (◡𝑅 ⊆ 𝑅 → (( I ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ⊆ 𝑅 ↔ ( I ↾ dom 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅))
Theorem	symrefref3 34938*	Symmetry is a sufficient condition for the equivalence of two versions of the reflexive relation, cf. symrefref2 34937. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Aug-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝑦𝑅𝑥) → (∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝑅(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥𝑅𝑦) ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑥𝑅𝑥))
Theorem	refsymrels2 34939	Elements of the class of reflexive relations which are elements of the class of symmetric relations as well (like the elements of the class of equivalence relations dfeqvrels2 34960) can use the restricted version for their reflexive part (see below), not just the ( I ∩ (dom 𝑟 × ran 𝑟)) ⊆ 𝑟 version of dfrefrels2 34891, cf. the comment of dfrefrels2 34891. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 20-Jul-2019.)
⊢ ( RefRels ∩ SymRels ) = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ (( I ↾ dom 𝑟) ⊆ 𝑟 ∧ ◡𝑟 ⊆ 𝑟)}
Theorem	refsymrels3 34940*	Elements of the class of reflexive relations which are elements of the class of symmetric relations as well (like the elements of the class of equivalence relations dfeqvrels3 34961) can use the ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑟𝑥𝑟𝑥 version for their reflexive part, not just the ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑟∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝑟(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥𝑟𝑦) version of dfrefrels3 34892, cf. the comment of dfrefrels3 34892. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ( RefRels ∩ SymRels ) = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ (∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑟 𝑥𝑟𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑟𝑦 → 𝑦𝑟𝑥))}
Theorem	refsymrel2 34941	A relation which is reflexive and symmetric (like an equivalence relation) can use the restricted version for their reflexive part (see below), not just the ( I ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ⊆ 𝑅 version of dfrefrel2 34893, cf. the comment of dfrefrels2 34891. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (( RefRel 𝑅 ∧ SymRel 𝑅) ↔ ((( I ↾ dom 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ ◡𝑅 ⊆ 𝑅) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	refsymrel3 34942*	A relation which is reflexive and symmetric (like an equivalence relation) can use the ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅𝑥𝑅𝑥 version for its reflexive part, not just the ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝑅(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥𝑅𝑦) version of dfrefrel3 34894, cf. the comment of dfrefrel3 34894. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (( RefRel 𝑅 ∧ SymRel 𝑅) ↔ ((∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑥𝑅𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝑦𝑅𝑥)) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	elrefsymrels2 34943	Elements of the class of reflexive relations which are elements of the class of symmetric relations as well (like the elements of the class of equivalence relations dfeqvrels2 34960) can use the restricted version for their reflexive part (see below), not just the ( I ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ⊆ 𝑅 version of dfrefrels2 34891, cf. the comment of dfrefrels2 34891. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ ( RefRels ∩ SymRels ) ↔ ((( I ↾ dom 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ ◡𝑅 ⊆ 𝑅) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elrefsymrels3 34944*	Elements of the class of reflexive relations which are elements of the class of symmetric relations as well (like the elements of the class of equivalence relations dfeqvrels3 34961) can use the ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅𝑥𝑅𝑥 version for their reflexive part, not just the ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝑅(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥𝑅𝑦) version of dfrefrels3 34892, cf. the comment of dfrefrels3 34892. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ ( RefRels ∩ SymRels ) ↔ ((∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑥𝑅𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝑦𝑅𝑥)) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elrefsymrelsrel 34945	For sets, being an element of the class of reflexive and symmetric relations is equivalent to satisfying the reflexive and symmetric relation predicates. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ∈ ( RefRels ∩ SymRels ) ↔ ( RefRel 𝑅 ∧ SymRel 𝑅)))
20.21.11  Transitivity
Definition	df-trs 34946	Define the class of all transitive sets (versus the transitive class defined in df-tr 4988). It is used only by df-trrels 34947. Note the similarity of the definitions of df-refs 34888, df-syms 34916 and df-trs 34946. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.)
⊢ Trs = {𝑥 ∣ ((𝑥 ∩ (dom 𝑥 × ran 𝑥)) ∘ (𝑥 ∩ (dom 𝑥 × ran 𝑥))) S (𝑥 ∩ (dom 𝑥 × ran 𝑥))}
Definition	df-trrels 34947	Define the class of transitive relations. For sets, being an element of the class of transitive relations is equivalent to satisfying the transitive relation predicate, cf. eltrrelsrel 34955. Alternate definitions are dftrrels2 34949 and dftrrels3 34950. This definition is similar to the definitions of the classes of reflexive (df-refrels 34889) and symmetric (df-symrels 34917) relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 7-Jul-2019.)
⊢ TrRels = ( Trs ∩ Rels )
Definition	df-trrel 34948	Define the transitive relation predicate. (Read: 𝑅 is a transitive relation.) For sets, being an element of the class of transitive relations (df-trrels 34947) is equivalent to satisfying the transitive relation predicate, cf. eltrrelsrel 34955. Alternate definitions are dftrrel2 34951 and dftrrel3 34952. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.)
⊢ ( TrRel 𝑅 ↔ (((𝑅 ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ∘ (𝑅 ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅))) ⊆ (𝑅 ∩ (dom 𝑅 × ran 𝑅)) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	dftrrels2 34949	Alternate definition of the class of transitive relations. I'd prefer to define the class of transitive relations by using the definition of composition by [Suppes] p. 63. df-coSUP (𝐴 ∘ 𝐵) = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ ∃𝑢(𝑥𝐴𝑢 ∧ 𝑢𝐵𝑦)} as opposed to the present definition of composition df-co 5364 (𝐴 ∘ 𝐵) = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ ∃𝑢(𝑥𝐵𝑢 ∧ 𝑢𝐴𝑦)} because the Suppes definition keeps the order of 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶, 𝑅, 𝑆, 𝑇 by default in trsinxpSUP ( ( ( R i^i ( A X. B ) ) o. ( S i^i ( B X. C ) ) ) C_ ( T i^i ( A X. C ) ) <-> A. x e. A A. y e. B A. z e. C ( ( x R y /\ y S z ) -> x T z ) ) while the present definition of composition disarranges them: trsinxp ( ( ( S i^i ( B X. C ) ) o. ( R i^i ( A X. B ) ) ) C_ ( T i^i ( A X. C ) ) <-> A. x e. A A. y e. B A. z e. C ( ( x R y /\ y S z ) -> x T z ) ). This is not mission critical to me, the implication of the Suppes definition is just more aesthetic, at least in the above case. If we swap to the Suppes definition of class composition, I would define the present class of all transitive sets as df-trsSUP and I would consider to switch the definition of the class of cosets by 𝑅 from the present df-coss 34797 to a df-cossSUP. But perhaps there is a mathematical reason to keep the present definition of composition. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 21-Jul-2021.)
⊢ TrRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ (𝑟 ∘ 𝑟) ⊆ 𝑟}
Theorem	dftrrels3 34950*	Alternate definition of the class of transitive relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Jul-2021.)
⊢ TrRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧((𝑥𝑟𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑟𝑧) → 𝑥𝑟𝑧)}
Theorem	dftrrel2 34951	Alternate definition of the transitive relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ( TrRel 𝑅 ↔ ((𝑅 ∘ 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	dftrrel3 34952*	Alternate definition of the transitive relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Aug-2021.)
⊢ ( TrRel 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	eltrrels2 34953	Element of the class of transitive relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ TrRels ↔ ((𝑅 ∘ 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	eltrrels3 34954*	Element of the class of transitive relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ TrRels ↔ (∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	eltrrelsrel 34955	For sets, being an element of the class of transitive relations is equivalent to satisfying the transitive relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ∈ TrRels ↔ TrRel 𝑅))
Theorem	trreleq 34956	Equality theorem for the transitive relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 15-Apr-2019.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 23-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → ( TrRel 𝑅 ↔ TrRel 𝑆))
20.21.12  Equivalence relations
Definition	df-eqvrels 34957	Define the class of equivalence relations. For sets, being an element of the class of equivalence relations is equivalent to satisfying the equivalence relation predicate, cf. eleqvrelsrel 34966. Alternate definitions are dfeqvrels2 34960 and dfeqvrels3 34961. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 7-Nov-2018.)
⊢ EqvRels = (( RefRels ∩ SymRels ) ∩ TrRels )
Definition	df-eqvrel 34958	Define the equivalence relation predicate. (Read: 𝑅 is an equivalence relation.) For sets, being an element of the class of equivalence relations (df-eqvrels 34957) is equivalent to satisfying the equivalence relation predicate, cf. eleqvrelsrel 34966. Alternate definitions are dfeqvrel2 34962 and dfeqvrel3 34963. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Apr-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 ↔ ( RefRel 𝑅 ∧ SymRel 𝑅 ∧ TrRel 𝑅))
Definition	df-eleqvrel 34959	Define the elementhood equivalence relation predicate. (Read: 𝐴 has disjoint elements, or, the elementhood equivalence relation on 𝐴.) We do not use this definition, this is just a placeholder for the sake of the symmetry with ~? df-eldisj . Disjointness of two sets is often defined as no elements in common: we cannot ignore this tradition completely. This is why we need ~? df-eldisj which in our case is a special case of a more general disjointness definition ~? df-disjALTV . We could use a corresponding elementhood equivalence relation (i.e., this definition), but this would change ~? mpet3 to a much less intuitive form. Instead, we defined coelements df-coels 34798 as a special case of cosets df-coss 34797, and use the general equivalence relation definition with these special cosets, i.e., with coelements, which results in the more intuitive ~? mpet3 . (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 11-Dec-2021.)
⊢ ( ElEqvRel 𝐴 ↔ EqvRel ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴))
Theorem	dfeqvrels2 34960	Alternate definition of the class of equivalence relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 2-Dec-2019.)
⊢ EqvRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ (( I ↾ dom 𝑟) ⊆ 𝑟 ∧ ◡𝑟 ⊆ 𝑟 ∧ (𝑟 ∘ 𝑟) ⊆ 𝑟)}
Theorem	dfeqvrels3 34961*	Alternate definition of the class of equivalence relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 2-Dec-2019.)
⊢ EqvRels = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ (∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑟 𝑥𝑟𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑟𝑦 → 𝑦𝑟𝑥) ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧((𝑥𝑟𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑟𝑧) → 𝑥𝑟𝑧))}
Theorem	dfeqvrel2 34962	Alternate definition of the equivalence relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Apr-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 ↔ ((( I ↾ dom 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ ◡𝑅 ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ (𝑅 ∘ 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	dfeqvrel3 34963*	Alternate definition of the equivalence relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Apr-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 ↔ ((∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑥𝑅𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝑦𝑅𝑥) ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧)) ∧ Rel 𝑅))
Theorem	eleqvrels2 34964	Element of the class of equivalence relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ EqvRels ↔ ((( I ↾ dom 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ ◡𝑅 ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ (𝑅 ∘ 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	eleqvrels3 34965*	Element of the class of equivalence relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ EqvRels ↔ ((∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑥𝑅𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝑦𝑅𝑥) ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧)) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	eleqvrelsrel 34966	For sets, being an element of the class of equivalence relations is equivalent to satisfying the equivalence relation predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ∈ EqvRels ↔ EqvRel 𝑅))
Theorem	eqvrelrel 34967	An equivalence relation is a relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 → Rel 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelrefrel 34968	An equivalence relation is reflexive. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 → RefRel 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelsymrel 34969	An equivalence relation is symmetric. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 → SymRel 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvreltrrel 34970	An equivalence relation is transitive. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 → TrRel 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelim 34971	Equivalence relation implies that the domain and the range are equal. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 → dom 𝑅 = ran 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvreleq 34972	Equality theorem for equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Apr-2020.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 23-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → ( EqvRel 𝑅 ↔ EqvRel 𝑆))
Theorem	eqvreleqi 34973	Equality theorem for equivalence relation, inference version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Sep-2021.)
⊢ 𝑅 = 𝑆    ⇒   ⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 ↔ EqvRel 𝑆)
Theorem	eqvreleqd 34974	Equality theorem for equivalence relation, deduction version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Sep-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 = 𝑆)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ( EqvRel 𝑅 ↔ EqvRel 𝑆))
Theorem	eqvrelsym 34975	An equivalence relation is symmetric. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵𝑅𝐴)
Theorem	eqvrelsymb 34976	An equivalence relation is symmetric. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jul-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised and distinct variable conditions removed by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝐵𝑅𝐴))
Theorem	eqvreltr 34977	An equivalence relation is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴𝑅𝐵 ∧ 𝐵𝑅𝐶) → 𝐴𝑅𝐶))
Theorem	eqvreltrd 34978	A transitivity relation for equivalences. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵𝑅𝐶)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐶)
Theorem	eqvreltr4d 34979	A transitivity relation for equivalences. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶𝑅𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐶)
Theorem	eqvrelref 34980	An equivalence relation is reflexive on its field. Compare Theorem 3M of [Enderton] p. 56. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-May-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐴)
Theorem	eqvrelth 34981	Basic property of equivalence relations. Theorem 73 of [Suppes] p. 82. (Contributed by NM, 23-Jul-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Jul-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ [𝐴]𝑅 = [𝐵]𝑅))
Theorem	eqvrelcl 34982	Elementhood in the field of an equivalence relation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelthi 34983	Basic property of equivalence relations. Part of Lemma 3N of [Enderton] p. 57. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jul-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → [𝐴]𝑅 = [𝐵]𝑅)
Theorem	eqvreldisj 34984	Equivalence classes do not overlap. In other words, two equivalence classes are either equal or disjoint. Theorem 74 of [Suppes] p. 83. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jun-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 → ([𝐴]𝑅 = [𝐵]𝑅 ∨ ([𝐴]𝑅 ∩ [𝐵]𝑅) = ∅))
Theorem	qsdisjALTV 34985	Elements of a quotient set do not overlap. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 12-Oct-2010.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 11-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 3-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ (𝐴 / 𝑅))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ (𝐴 / 𝑅))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) = ∅))
Theorem	eqvrelcoss 34986	Two ways to express equivalent cosets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 4-Jul-2020.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 20-Dec-2021.)
⊢ ( EqvRel ≀ 𝑅 ↔ TrRel ≀ 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelcoss3 34987*	Two ways to express equivalent cosets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Apr-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel ≀ 𝑅 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧((𝑥 ≀ 𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ≀ 𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥 ≀ 𝑅𝑧))
Theorem	eqvrelcoss2 34988	Two ways to express equivalent cosets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 3-May-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel ≀ 𝑅 ↔ ≀ ≀ 𝑅 ⊆ ≀ 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelcoss4 34989*	Two ways to express equivalent cosets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 3-May-2019.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 30-Sep-2021.)
⊢ ( EqvRel ≀ 𝑅 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑧(([𝑥] ≀ 𝑅 ∩ [𝑧] ≀ 𝑅) ≠ ∅ → ([𝑥]◡𝑅 ∩ [𝑧]◡𝑅) ≠ ∅))
Theorem	eqvrelcoels4 34990*	Two ways to express equivalent coelements. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 20-Oct-2021.)
⊢ ( EqvRel ∼ 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑧(([𝑥] ∼ 𝐴 ∩ [𝑧] ∼ 𝐴) ≠ ∅ → ([𝑥]◡(◡ E ↾ 𝐴) ∩ [𝑧]◡(◡ E ↾ 𝐴)) ≠ ∅))
Theorem	eqvrelqsel 34991	If an element of a quotient set contains a given element, it is equal to the equivalence class of the element. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 28-Dec-2019.)
⊢ (( EqvRel 𝑅 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (𝐴 / 𝑅) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝐵 = [𝐶]𝑅)
20.21.13  Redundancy
Definition	df-reds 34992*	Define the class of all redundant sets 𝑥 with respect to 𝑦 in 𝑧. For sets, binary relation on the class of all redundant sets (brreds 34995) is equivalent to satisfying the redundancy predicate (df-red 34993). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Oct-2022.)
⊢ Reds = ◡{⟨⟨𝑦, 𝑧⟩, 𝑥⟩ ∣ (𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 ∧ (𝑥 ∩ 𝑧) = (𝑦 ∩ 𝑧))}
Definition	df-red 34993	Define the redundancy predicate. Read: 𝐴 is redundant with respect to 𝐵 in 𝐶. For sets, binary relation on the class of all redundant sets (brreds 34995) is equivalent to satisfying the redundancy predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (𝐴 Red ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ ↔ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ (𝐴 ∩ 𝐶) = (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶)))
Definition	df-redp 34994	Define the redundancy operator for propositions, cf. df-red 34993. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Oct-2022.)
⊢ ( red (𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))))
Theorem	brreds 34995	Binary relation on the class of all redundant sets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Oct-2022.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑋) → (𝐴 Reds ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ ↔ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ (𝐴 ∩ 𝐶) = (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶))))
Theorem	brredsred 34996	For sets, binary relation on the class of all redundant sets (brreds 34995) is equivalent to satisfying the redundancy predicate (df-red 34993). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Oct-2022.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑋) → (𝐴 Reds ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ ↔ 𝐴 Red ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩))
Theorem	redss3 34997	Implication of redundancy predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ 𝐷 ⊆ 𝐶    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 Red ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ → 𝐴 Red ⟨𝐵, 𝐷⟩)
Theorem	redeq1 34998	Equivalence of redundancy predicates. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐷    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 Red ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ ↔ 𝐷 Red ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩)
Theorem	redpim3 34999	Implication of redundancy of proposition. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ ( red (𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) → red (𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜃))
Theorem	redpbi1 35000	Equivalence of redundancy of propositions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ ( red (𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ red (𝜃, 𝜓, 𝜒))