P. 357 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 35601-35700   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	wl-motae 35601	Change bound variable. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. Part of Lemma 7 of [KalishMontague] p. 86. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃*𝑢⊤ → ∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧)
Theorem	wl-moae 35602*	Two ways to express "at most one thing exists" or, in this context equivalently, "exactly one thing exists" . The equivalence results from the presence of ax-6 1972 in the proof, that ensures "at least one thing exists". For other equivalences see wl-euae 35603 and exists1 2662. Gerard Lang pointed out, that ∃𝑦∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 with disjoint 𝑥 and 𝑦 (df-mo 2540, trut 1545) also means "exactly one thing exists" . (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) State the theorem using truth constant ⊤. (Revised by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.) Reduce axiom dependencies, and use ∃*. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 7-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-euae 35603*	Two ways to express "exactly one thing exists" . (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-nax6im 35604*	The following series of theorems are centered around the empty domain, where no set exists. As a consequence, a set variable like 𝑥 has no instance to assign to. An expression like 𝑥 = 𝑦 is not really meaningful then. What does it evaluate to, true or false? In fact, the grammar extension weq 1967 requires us to formally assign a boolean value to an equation, say always false, unless you want to give up on exmid 891, for example. Whatever it is, we start out with the contraposition of ax-6 1972, that guarantees the existence of at least one set. Our hypothesis here expresses tentatively it might not hold. We can simplify the antecedent then, to the point where we do not need equation any more. This suggests what a decent characterization of the empty domain of discourse could be. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 12-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ → 𝜑)
Theorem	wl-hbae1 35605	This specialization of hbae 2431 does not depend on ax-11 2156. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 8-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-naevhba1v 35606*	An instance of hbn1w 2050 applied to equality. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 7-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-spae 35607	Prove an instance of sp 2178 from ax-13 2372 and Tarski's FOL only, without distinct variable conditions. The antecedent ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 holds in a multi-object universe only if 𝑦 is substituted for 𝑥, or vice versa, i.e. both variables are effectively the same. The converse ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 indicates that both variables are distinct, and it so provides a simple translation of a distinct variable condition to a logical term. In case studies ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 and ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 can help eliminating distinct variable conditions. The antecedent ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 is expressed in the theorem's name by the abbreviation ae standing for 'all equal'. Note that we cannot provide a logical predicate telling us directly whether a logical expression contains a particular variable, as such a construct would usually contradict ax-12 2173. Note that this theorem is also provable from ax-12 2173 alone, so you can pick the axiom it is based on. Compare this result to 19.3v 1986 and spaev 2056 having distinct variable conditions, but a smaller footprint on axiom usage. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-speqv 35608*	Under the assumption ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 a specialized version of sp 2178 is provable from Tarski's FOL and ax13v 2373 only. Note that this reverts the implication in ax13lem1 2374, so in fact (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦)) holds. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	wl-19.8eqv 35609*	Under the assumption ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 a specialized version of 19.8a 2176 is provable from Tarski's FOL and ax13v 2373 only. Note that this reverts the implication in ax13lem2 2376, so in fact (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦)) holds. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	wl-19.2reqv 35610*	Under the assumption ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 the reverse direction of 19.2 1981 is provable from Tarski's FOL and ax13v 2373 only. Note that in conjunction with 19.2 1981 in fact (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦)) holds. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	wl-nfalv 35611*	If 𝑥 is not present in 𝜑, it is not free in ∀𝑦𝜑. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Jan-2020.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑦𝜑
Theorem	wl-nfimf1 35612	An antecedent is irrelevant to a not-free property, if it always holds. I used this variant of nfim 1900 in dvelimdf 2449 to simplify the proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 14-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	wl-nfae1 35613	Unlike nfae 2433, this specialized theorem avoids ax-11 2156. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jun-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥
Theorem	wl-nfnae1 35614	Unlike nfnae 2434, this specialized theorem avoids ax-11 2156. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥
Theorem	wl-aetr 35615	A transitive law for variable identifying expressions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-axc11r 35616	Same as axc11r 2366, but using ax12 2423 instead of ax-12 2173 directly. This better reflects axiom usage in theorems dependent on it. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jul-2015.) Avoid direct use of ax-12 2173. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 30-Mar-2024.)
⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	wl-dral1d 35617	A version of dral1 2439 with a context. Note: At first glance one might be tempted to generalize this (or a similar) theorem by weakening the first two hypotheses adding a 𝑥 = 𝑦, ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 or 𝜑 antecedent. wl-equsal1i 35629 and nf5di 2285 show that this is in fact pointless. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒)))
Theorem	wl-cbvalnaed 35618	wl-cbvalnae 35619 with a context. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	wl-cbvalnae 35619	A more general version of cbval 2398 when nonfree properties depend on a distinctor. Such expressions arise in proofs aiming at the elimination of distinct variable constraints, specifically in application of dvelimf 2448, nfsb2 2487 or dveeq1 2380. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	wl-exeq 35620	The semantics of ∃𝑥𝑦 = 𝑧. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2018.)
⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (𝑦 = 𝑧 ∨ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-aleq 35621	The semantics of ∀𝑥𝑦 = 𝑧. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2018.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (𝑦 = 𝑧 ∧ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧)))
Theorem	wl-nfeqfb 35622	Extend nfeqf 2381 to an equivalence. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-nfs1t 35623	If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. Closed form of nfs1 2492. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-equsalvw 35624*	Version of equsalv 2262 with a disjoint variable condition, and of equsal 2417 with two disjoint variable conditions, which requires fewer axioms. See also the dual form equsexvw 2009. This theorem lays the foundation to a transformation of expressions called substitution of set variables in a wff. Only in this particular context we additionally assume 𝜑 and 𝑦 disjoint, stated here as 𝜑(𝑥). Similarly the disjointness of 𝜓 and 𝑥 is expressed by 𝜓(𝑦). Both 𝜑 and 𝜓 may still depend on other set variables, but that is irrelevant here. We want to transform 𝜑(𝑥) into 𝜓(𝑦) such that 𝜓 depends on 𝑦 the same way as 𝜑 depends on 𝑥. This dependency is expressed in our hypothesis (called implicit substitution): (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)). For primitive enough 𝜑 a sort of textual substitution of 𝑥 by 𝑦 is sufficient for such transformation. But note: 𝜑 must not contain wff variables, and the substitution is no proper textual substitution either. We still need grammar information to not accidently replace the x in a token 'x.' denoting multiplication, but only catch set variables 𝑥. Our current stage of development allows only equations and quantifiers make up such primitives. Thanks to equequ1 2029 and cbvalvw 2040 we can then prove in a mechanical way that in fact the implicit substitution holds for each instance. If 𝜑 contains wff variables we cannot use textual transformation any longer, since we don't know how to replace 𝑦 for 𝑥 in placeholders of unknown structure. Our theorem now states, that the generic expression ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) formally behaves as if such a substitution was possible and made. (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	wl-equsald 35625	Deduction version of equsal 2417. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	wl-equsal 35626	A useful equivalence related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) It seems proving wl-equsald 35625 first, and then deriving more specialized versions wl-equsal 35626 and wl-equsal1t 35627 then is more efficient than the other way round, which is possible, too. See also equsal 2417. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	wl-equsal1t 35627	The expression 𝑥 = 𝑦 in antecedent position plays an important role in predicate logic, namely in implicit substitution. However, occasionally it is irrelevant, and can safely be dropped. A sufficient condition for this is when 𝑥 (or 𝑦 or both) is not free in 𝜑. This theorem is more fundamental than equsal 2417, spimt 2386 or sbft 2265, to which it is related. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 19-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	wl-equsalcom 35628	This simple equivalence eases substitution of one expression for the other. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 1-Sep-2018.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑))
Theorem	wl-equsal1i 35629	The antecedent 𝑥 = 𝑦 is irrelevant, if one or both setvar variables are not free in 𝜑. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 1-Sep-2018.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ∨ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	wl-sb6rft 35630	A specialization of wl-equsal1t 35627. Closed form of sb6rf 2468. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-cbvalsbi 35631*	Change bounded variables in a special case. The reverse direction seems to involve ax-11 2156. My hope is that I will in some future be able to prove mo3 2564 with reversed quantifiers not using ax-11 2156. See also the remark in mo4 2566, which lead me to this effort. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2024.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-sbrimt 35632	Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2304. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)))
Theorem	wl-sblimt 35633	Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2304. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	wl-sb8t 35634	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8 2521. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8et 35635	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8e 2522. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sbhbt 35636	Closed form of sbhb 2525. Characterizing the expression 𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑 using a substitution expression. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-sbnf1 35637	Two ways expressing that 𝑥 is effectively not free in 𝜑. Simplified version of sbnf2 2356. Note: This theorem shows that sbnf2 2356 has unnecessary distinct variable constraints. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-equsb3 35638	equsb3 2103 with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-equsb4 35639	Substitution applied to an atomic wff. The distinctor antecedent is more general than a distinct variable condition. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-2sb6d 35640	Version of 2sb6 2090 with a context, and distinct variable conditions replaced with distinctors. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑤)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑧 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑦]𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → 𝜓)))
Theorem	wl-sbcom2d-lem1 35641*	Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 35643. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 10-Aug-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑣 = 𝑤) → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑤 → ([𝑢 / 𝑥][𝑣 / 𝑧]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑧]𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-sbcom2d-lem2 35642*	Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 35643. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 10-Aug-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → ([𝑢 / 𝑥][𝑣 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑥 = 𝑢 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑣) → 𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-sbcom2d 35643	Version of sbcom2 2163 with a context, and distinct variable conditions replaced with distinctors. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑤)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑦)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑤 / 𝑧][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑧]𝜓))
Theorem	wl-sbalnae 35644	A theorem used in elimination of disjoint variable restrictions by replacing them with distinctors. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2019.)
⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧) → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sbal1 35645*	A theorem used in elimination of disjoint variable restriction on 𝑥 and 𝑦 by replacing it with a distinctor ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑧. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1993.) Proof is based on wl-sbalnae 35644 now. See also sbal1 2533. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sbal2 35646*	Move quantifier in and out of substitution. Revised to remove a distinct variable constraint. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) Proof is based on wl-sbalnae 35644 now. See also sbal2 2534. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-2spsbbi 35647	spsbbi 2077 applied twice. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Aug-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑎∀𝑏(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ([𝑦 / 𝑏][𝑥 / 𝑎]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑏][𝑥 / 𝑎]𝜓))
Theorem	wl-lem-exsb 35648*	This theorem provides a basic working step in proving theorems about ∃* or ∃!. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-lem-nexmo 35649	This theorem provides a basic working step in proving theorems about ∃* or ∃!. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-lem-moexsb 35650*	The antecedent ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧) relates to ∃*𝑥𝜑, but is better suited for usage in proofs. Note that no distinct variable restriction is placed on 𝜑. This theorem provides a basic working step in proving theorems about ∃* or ∃!. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧) → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-alanbii 35651	This theorem extends alanimi 1820 to a biconditional. Recurrent usage stacks up more quantifiers. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∀𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	wl-mo2df 35652	Version of mof 2563 with a context and a distinctor replacing a distinct variable condition. This version should be used only to eliminate disjoint variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-mo2tf 35653	Closed form of mof 2563 with a distinctor avoiding distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2020.)
⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-eudf 35654	Version of eu6 2574 with a context and a distinctor replacing a distinct variable condition. This version should be used only to eliminate disjoint variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜓 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-eutf 35655	Closed form of eu6 2574 with a distinctor avoiding distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.)
⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-euequf 35656	euequ 2597 proved with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-mo2t 35657*	Closed form of mof 2563. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-mo3t 35658*	Closed form of mo3 2564. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-sb8eut 35659	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8eu 2600. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8mot 35660	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8mo 2601. This theorem relates to wl-mo3t 35658, since replacing 𝜑 with [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 in the latter yields subexpressions like [𝑥 / 𝑦][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑, which can be reduced to 𝜑 via sbft 2265 and sbco 2511. So ∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 is provable from wl-mo3t 35658 in a simple fashion, unfortunately only if 𝑥 and 𝑦 are known to be distinct. To avoid any hassle with distinctors, we prefer to derive this theorem independently, ignoring the close connection between both theorems. From an educational standpoint, one would assume wl-mo3t 35658 to be more fundamental, as it hints how the "at most one" objects on both sides of the biconditional correlate (they are the same), if they exist at all, and then prove this theorem from it. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-axc11rc11 35661	Proving axc11r 2366 from axc11 2430. The hypotheses are two instances of axc11 2430 used in the proof here. Some systems introduce axc11 2430 as an axiom, see for example System S2 in https://us.metamath.org/downloads/finiteaxiom.pdf 2430. By contrast, this database sees the variant axc11r 2366, directly derived from ax-12 2173, as foundational. Later axc11 2430 is proven somewhat trickily, requiring ax-10 2139 and ax-13 2372, see its proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Jul-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → ∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑥))    &   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))
Axiom	ax-wl-11v 35662*	Version of ax-11 2156 with distinct variable conditions. Currently implemented as an axiom to detect unintended references to the foundational axiom ax-11 2156. It will later be converted into a theorem directly based on ax-11 2156. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem1 35663	A transitive law for variable identifying expressions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 ↔ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem2 35664*	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑥 𝑢 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem3 35665*	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem4 35666*	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem5 35667	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑢[𝑢 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem6 35668*	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (∀𝑢∀𝑥[𝑢 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem7 35669	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem8 35670*	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (∀𝑢∀𝑥[𝑢 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem9 35671	The easy part when 𝑥 coincides with 𝑦. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem10 35672*	We now have prepared everything. The unwanted variable 𝑢 is just in one place left. pm2.61 191 can be used in conjunction with wl-ax11-lem9 35671 to eliminate the second antecedent. Missing is something along the lines of ax-6 1972, so we could remove the first antecedent. But the Metamath axioms cannot accomplish this. Such a rule must reside one abstraction level higher than all others: It says that a distinctor implies a distinct variable condition on its contained setvar. This is only needed if such conditions are required, as ax-11v does. The result of this study is for me, that you cannot introduce a setvar capturing this condition, and hope to eliminate it later. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑢 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-clabv 35673*	Variant of df-clab 2716, where the element 𝑥 is required to be disjoint from the class it is taken from. This restriction meets similar ones found in other definitions and axioms like ax-ext 2709, df-clel 2817 and df-cleq 2730. 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 with 𝐴 depending on 𝑥 can be the source of side effects, that you rather want to be aware of. So here we eliminate one possible way of letting this slip in instead. An expression 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 with 𝑥, 𝐴 not disjoint, is now only introduced either via ax-8 2110, ax-9 2118, or df-clel 2817. Theorem cleljust 2117 shows that a possible choice does not matter. The original df-clab 2716 can be rederived, see wl-dfclab 35674. In an implementation this theorem is the only user of df-clab. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) Element and class are disjoint. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 31-May-2023.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-dfclab 35674	Rederive df-clab 2716 from wl-clabv 35673. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-May-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-clabtv 35675*	Using class abstraction in a context, requiring 𝑥 and 𝜑 disjoint, but based on fewer axioms than wl-clabt 35676. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)})
Theorem	wl-clabt 35676	Using class abstraction in a context. For a version based on fewer axioms see wl-clabtv 35675. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)})
20.19  Mathbox for Brendan Leahy
Theorem	rabiun 35677*	Abstraction restricted to an indexed union. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 26-Oct-2017.)
⊢ {𝑥 ∈ ∪ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∣ 𝜑} = ∪ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 {𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	iundif1 35678*	Indexed union of class difference with the subtrahend held constant. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 6-Aug-2018.)
⊢ ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐵 ∖ 𝐶) = (∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∖ 𝐶)
Theorem	imadifss 35679	The difference of images is a subset of the image of the difference. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ ((𝐹 “ 𝐴) ∖ (𝐹 “ 𝐵)) ⊆ (𝐹 “ (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵))
Theorem	cureq 35680	Equality theorem for currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → curry 𝐴 = curry 𝐵)
Theorem	unceq 35681	Equality theorem for uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → uncurry 𝐴 = uncurry 𝐵)
Theorem	curf 35682	Functional property of currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ {∅}) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑊) → curry 𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵))
Theorem	uncf 35683	Functional property of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) → uncurry 𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶)
Theorem	curfv 35684	Value of currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (((𝐹 Fn (𝑉 × 𝑊) ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ 𝑊 ∈ 𝑋) → ((curry 𝐹‘𝐴)‘𝐵) = (𝐴𝐹𝐵))
Theorem	uncov 35685	Value of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴uncurry 𝐹𝐵) = ((𝐹‘𝐴)‘𝐵))
Theorem	curunc 35686	Currying of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) ∧ 𝐵 ≠ ∅) → curry uncurry 𝐹 = 𝐹)
Theorem	unccur 35687	Uncurrying of currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 5-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ {∅}) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑊) → uncurry curry 𝐹 = 𝐹)
Theorem	phpreu 35688*	Theorem related to pigeonhole principle. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ Fin ∧ 𝐴 ≈ 𝐵) → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑥 = 𝐶 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑥 = 𝐶))
Theorem	finixpnum 35689*	A finite Cartesian product of numerable sets is numerable. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 24-Feb-2019.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ Fin ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ dom card) → X𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ dom card)
Theorem	fin2solem 35690*	Lemma for fin2so 35691. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 29-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝑥 ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥)) → (𝑦𝑅𝑧 → {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑦} [⊊] {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑧}))
Theorem	fin2so 35691	Any totally ordered Tarski-finite set is finite; in particular, no amorphous set can be ordered. Theorem 2 of [Levy58]] p. 4. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 28-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ FinII ∧ 𝑅 Or 𝐴) → 𝐴 ∈ Fin)
Theorem	ltflcei 35692	Theorem to move the floor function across a strict inequality. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 25-Oct-2017.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℝ) → ((⌊‘𝐴) < 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 < -(⌊‘-𝐵)))
Theorem	leceifl 35693	Theorem to move the floor function across a non-strict inequality. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 25-Oct-2017.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℝ) → (-(⌊‘-𝐴) ≤ 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ≤ (⌊‘𝐵)))
Theorem	sin2h 35694	Half-angle rule for sine. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 3-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (0[,](2 · π)) → (sin‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 − (cos‘𝐴)) / 2)))
Theorem	cos2h 35695	Half-angle rule for cosine. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (-π[,]π) → (cos‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 + (cos‘𝐴)) / 2)))
Theorem	tan2h 35696	Half-angle rule for tangent. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (0[,)π) → (tan‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 − (cos‘𝐴)) / (1 + (cos‘𝐴)))))
Theorem	lindsadd 35697	In a vector space, the union of an independent set and a vector not in its span is an independent set. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Mar-2023.)
⊢ ((𝑊 ∈ LVec ∧ 𝐹 ∈ (LIndS‘𝑊) ∧ 𝑋 ∈ ((Base‘𝑊) ∖ ((LSpan‘𝑊)‘𝐹))) → (𝐹 ∪ {𝑋}) ∈ (LIndS‘𝑊))
Theorem	lindsdom 35698	A linearly independent set in a free linear module of finite dimension over a division ring is smaller than the dimension of the module. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝑅 ∈ DivRing ∧ 𝐼 ∈ Fin ∧ 𝑋 ∈ (LIndS‘(𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼))) → 𝑋 ≼ 𝐼)
Theorem	lindsenlbs 35699	A maximal linearly independent set in a free module of finite dimension over a division ring is a basis. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (((𝑅 ∈ DivRing ∧ 𝐼 ∈ Fin ∧ 𝑋 ∈ (LIndS‘(𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼))) ∧ 𝑋 ≈ 𝐼) → 𝑋 ∈ (LBasis‘(𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼)))
Theorem	matunitlindflem1 35700	One direction of matunitlindf 35702. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (((𝑅 ∈ Field ∧ 𝑀:(𝐼 × 𝐼)⟶(Base‘𝑅)) ∧ 𝐼 ∈ (Fin ∖ {∅})) → (¬ curry 𝑀 LIndF (𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼) → ((𝐼 maDet 𝑅)‘𝑀) = (0g‘𝑅)))