P. 354 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 35301-35400   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
21.6.10  Godel-sets of formulas - part 1
Syntax	cgoe 35301	The Godel-set of membership.
class ∈𝑔
Syntax	cgna 35302	The Godel-set for the Sheffer stroke.
class ⊼𝑔
Syntax	cgol 35303	The Godel-set of universal quantification. (Note that this is not a wff.)
class ∀𝑔𝑁𝑈
Syntax	csat 35304	The satisfaction function.
class Sat
Syntax	cfmla 35305	The formula set predicate.
class Fmla
Syntax	csate 35306	The ∈-satisfaction function.
class Sat∈
Syntax	cprv 35307	The "proves" relation.
class ⊧
Definition	df-goel 35308	Define the Godel-set of membership. Here the arguments 𝑥 = ⟨𝑁, 𝑃⟩ correspond to vN and vP , so (∅∈𝑔1o) actually means v0 ∈ v1 , not 0 ∈ 1. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.)
⊢ ∈𝑔 = (𝑥 ∈ (ω × ω) ↦ ⟨∅, 𝑥⟩)
Definition	df-gona 35309	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 35310	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 35311*	Define the satisfaction predicate. This recursive construction builds up a function over wff codes (see satff 35378) 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 vi ∈ vj is coded as ⟨∅, ⟨𝑖, 𝑗⟩⟩, (𝜑 ⊼ 𝜓) is coded as ⟨1o, ⟨𝜑, 𝜓⟩⟩, and ∀ vi 𝜑 is coded as ⟨2o, ⟨𝑖, 𝜑⟩⟩. (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 35312*	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 35313	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 35311 for the full coding scheme), see fmla0 35350, and each extra level adds to the complexity of the formulas in (Fmla‘𝑛), see fmlasuc 35354. 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 35412. (Fmla‘ω) = ∪ 𝑛 ∈ ω(Fmla‘𝑛) is the set of all valid formulas, see fmla 35349. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jul-2013.)
⊢ Fmla = (𝑛 ∈ suc ω ↦ dom ((∅ Sat ∅)‘𝑛))
Definition	df-prv 35314*	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 35398 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 35315	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 35316	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 35317	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 35318	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 35319	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 35320	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 35321*	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 35322*	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 35323	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 35324*	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 35325*	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 35326*	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 35327*	Lemma 1 for satfvsuc 35329. (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 35328*	Lemma 2 for satfvsuc 35329. (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 35329*	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 35330*	Lemma for satfv1 35331. (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 35331*	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 35332	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 35333*	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 35334*	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 35335	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 35336*	Lemma for satfdm 35337. (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 35337*	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 35338	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 35339	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 35340*	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 35341*	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 35342*	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 35343*	Lemma for satf0suc 35344, sat1el2xp 35347 and fmlasuc0 35352. (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 35344*	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 35345*	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 35346	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 35347*	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 35348	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 35349	The set of all valid Godel formulas. (Contributed by AV, 20-Sep-2023.)
⊢ (Fmla‘ω) = ∪ 𝑛 ∈ ω (Fmla‘𝑛)
Theorem	fmla0 35350*	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 35351	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 35352*	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 35353	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 35354*	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 35355*	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 35356*	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 35357	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 35358	The empty set is not a Godel formula of any height. (Contributed by AV, 21-Oct-2023.)
⊢ (𝑁 ∈ ω → ∅ ∉ (Fmla‘𝑁))
Theorem	fmlan0 35359	The empty set is not a Godel formula. (Contributed by AV, 19-Nov-2023.)
⊢ ∅ ∉ (Fmla‘ω)
Theorem	gonan0 35360	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 35361*	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 35362*	Lemma for gonar 35363 (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 35363*	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 35364*	Lemma for goalr 35365 (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 35365*	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 35366*	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 35367*	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 35368	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 35369	Lemma for satffunlem1lem1 35370 and satffunlem2lem1 35372. (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 35370*	Lemma for satffunlem1 35375. (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 35371*	Lemma 2 for satffunlem1 35375. (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 35372*	Lemma 1 for satffunlem2 35376. (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 35373*	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 35374*	Lemma 2 for satffunlem2 35376. (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 35375	Lemma 1 for satffun 35377: induction basis. (Contributed by AV, 28-Oct-2023.)
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐸 ∈ 𝑊) → Fun ((𝑀 Sat 𝐸)‘suc ∅))
Theorem	satffunlem2 35376	Lemma 2 for satffun 35377: 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 35377	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 35378	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 35379	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 35380	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 35381*	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 35382	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 35383	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 35384	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 35385	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 35386*	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 35387	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 35388	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 35389*	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 35390*	Instance of sategoelfv 35388 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 35391*	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 35392	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 35393*	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 35394*	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 35395	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 35396	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 35397	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 9676. (Contributed by AV, 5-Nov-2023.)
⊢ ((𝑀 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ ω ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ω) → 𝑀⊧((𝐴∈𝑔𝐵)⊼𝑔(𝐵∈𝑔𝐴)))
Theorem	prv0 35398	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 35399	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))
21.6.11  Godel-sets of formulas - part 2
Syntax	cgon 35400	The Godel-set of negation. (Note that this is not a wff.)
class ¬𝑔𝑈