P. 358 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 35701-35800   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	wl-cbvalnae 35701	A more general version of cbval 2399 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 2449, nfsb2 2488 or dveeq1 2381. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	wl-exeq 35702	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 35703	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 35704	Extend nfeqf 2382 to an equivalence. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-nfs1t 35705	If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. Closed form of nfs1 2493. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-equsalvw 35706*	Version of equsalv 2260 with a disjoint variable condition, and of equsal 2418 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 35707	Deduction version of equsal 2418. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	wl-equsal 35708	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 35707 first, and then deriving more specialized versions wl-equsal 35708 and wl-equsal1t 35709 then is more efficient than the other way round, which is possible, too. See also equsal 2418. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	wl-equsal1t 35709	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 2418, spimt 2387 or sbft 2263, to which it is related. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 19-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	wl-equsalcom 35710	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 35711	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 35712	A specialization of wl-equsal1t 35709. Closed form of sb6rf 2469. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-cbvalsbi 35713*	Change bounded variables in a special case. The reverse direction seems to involve ax-11 2155. My hope is that I will in some future be able to prove mo3 2565 with reversed quantifiers not using ax-11 2155. See also the remark in mo4 2567, which lead me to this effort. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2024.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-sbrimt 35714	Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2302. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)))
Theorem	wl-sblimt 35715	Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2302. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	wl-sb8t 35716	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8 2522. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8et 35717	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8e 2523. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sbhbt 35718	Closed form of sbhb 2526. 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 35719	Two ways expressing that 𝑥 is effectively not free in 𝜑. Simplified version of sbnf2 2357. Note: This theorem shows that sbnf2 2357 has unnecessary distinct variable constraints. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-equsb3 35720	equsb3 2102 with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-equsb4 35721	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 35722	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 35723*	Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 35725. (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 35724*	Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 35725. (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 35725	Version of sbcom2 2162 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 35726	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 35727*	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 35726 now. See also sbal1 2534. (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 35728*	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 35726 now. See also sbal2 2535. (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 35729	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 35730*	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 35731	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 35732*	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 35733	This theorem extends alanimi 1819 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 35734	Version of mof 2564 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 35735	Closed form of mof 2564 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 35736	Version of eu6 2575 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 35737	Closed form of eu6 2575 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 35738	euequ 2598 proved with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-mo2t 35739*	Closed form of mof 2564. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-mo3t 35740*	Closed form of mo3 2565. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-sb8eut 35741	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8eu 2601. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8mot 35742	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8mo 2602. This theorem relates to wl-mo3t 35740, 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 2263 and sbco 2512. So ∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 is provable from wl-mo3t 35740 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 35740 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 35743	Proving axc11r 2367 from axc11 2431. The hypotheses are two instances of axc11 2431 used in the proof here. Some systems introduce axc11 2431 as an axiom, see for example System S2 in https://us.metamath.org/downloads/finiteaxiom.pdf 2431. By contrast, this database sees the variant axc11r 2367, directly derived from ax-12 2172, as foundational. Later axc11 2431 is proven somewhat trickily, requiring ax-10 2138 and ax-13 2373, 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 35744*	Version of ax-11 2155 with distinct variable conditions. Currently implemented as an axiom to detect unintended references to the foundational axiom ax-11 2155. It will later be converted into a theorem directly based on ax-11 2155. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem1 35745	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 35746*	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑥 𝑢 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem3 35747*	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem4 35748*	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem5 35749	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑢[𝑢 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem6 35750*	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 35751	Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	wl-ax11-lem8 35752*	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 35753	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 35754*	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 35753 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 35755*	Variant of df-clab 2717, 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 2710, df-clel 2817 and df-cleq 2731. 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 2109, ax-9 2117, or df-clel 2817. Theorem cleljust 2116 shows that a possible choice does not matter. The original df-clab 2717 can be rederived, see wl-dfclab 35756. 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 35756	Rederive df-clab 2717 from wl-clabv 35755. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-May-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-clabtv 35757*	Using class abstraction in a context, requiring 𝑥 and 𝜑 disjoint, but based on fewer axioms than wl-clabt 35758. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)})
Theorem	wl-clabt 35758	Using class abstraction in a context. For a version based on fewer axioms see wl-clabtv 35757. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)})
20.19  Mathbox for Brendan Leahy
Theorem	rabiun 35759*	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 35760*	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 35761	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 35762	Equality theorem for currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → curry 𝐴 = curry 𝐵)
Theorem	unceq 35763	Equality theorem for uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → uncurry 𝐴 = uncurry 𝐵)
Theorem	curf 35764	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 35765	Functional property of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) → uncurry 𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶)
Theorem	curfv 35766	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 35767	Value of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴uncurry 𝐹𝐵) = ((𝐹‘𝐴)‘𝐵))
Theorem	curunc 35768	Currying of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) ∧ 𝐵 ≠ ∅) → curry uncurry 𝐹 = 𝐹)
Theorem	unccur 35769	Uncurrying of currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 5-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ {∅}) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑊) → uncurry curry 𝐹 = 𝐹)
Theorem	phpreu 35770*	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 35771*	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 35772*	Lemma for fin2so 35773. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 29-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝑥 ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥)) → (𝑦𝑅𝑧 → {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑦} [⊊] {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑧}))
Theorem	fin2so 35773	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 35774	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 35775	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 35776	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 35777	Half-angle rule for cosine. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (-π[,]π) → (cos‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 + (cos‘𝐴)) / 2)))
Theorem	tan2h 35778	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 35779	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 35780	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 35781	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 35782	One direction of matunitlindf 35784. (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)))
Theorem	matunitlindflem2 35783	One direction of matunitlindf 35784. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((((𝑅 ∈ Field ∧ 𝑀 ∈ (Base‘(𝐼 Mat 𝑅))) ∧ 𝐼 ≠ ∅) ∧ curry 𝑀 LIndF (𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼)) → ((𝐼 maDet 𝑅)‘𝑀) ∈ (Unit‘𝑅))
Theorem	matunitlindf 35784	A matrix over a field is invertible iff the rows are linearly independent. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝑅 ∈ Field ∧ 𝑀 ∈ (Base‘(𝐼 Mat 𝑅))) → (𝑀 ∈ (Unit‘(𝐼 Mat 𝑅)) ↔ curry 𝑀 LIndF (𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼)))
Theorem	ptrest 35785*	Expressing a restriction of a product topology as a product topology. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 24-Mar-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶Top)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑘 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑆 ∈ 𝑊)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((∏t‘𝐹) ↾t X𝑘 ∈ 𝐴 𝑆) = (∏t‘(𝑘 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ ((𝐹‘𝑘) ↾t 𝑆))))
Theorem	ptrecube 35786*	Any point in an open set of N-space is surrounded by an open cube within that set. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) (Proof shortened by AV, 28-Sep-2020.)
⊢ 𝑅 = (∏t‘((1...𝑁) × {(topGen‘ran (,))}))    &   ⊢ 𝐷 = ((abs ∘ − ) ↾ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑆 ∈ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑃 ∈ 𝑆) → ∃𝑑 ∈ ℝ+ X𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝑃‘𝑛)(ball‘𝐷)𝑑) ⊆ 𝑆)
Theorem	poimirlem1 35787*	Lemma for poimir 35819- the vertices on either side of a skipped vertex differ in at least two dimensions. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < 𝑀, 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌(𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0})))))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑁)⟶ℤ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∃*𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 1))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘𝑀)‘𝑛))
Theorem	poimirlem2 35788*	Lemma for poimir 35819- consecutive vertices differ in at most one dimension. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < 𝑀, 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌(𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0})))))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑁)⟶ℤ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑉 ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ((0...𝑁) ∖ {𝑉}))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑉 − 1))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘𝑉)‘𝑛))
Theorem	poimirlem3 35789*	Lemma for poimir 35819 to add an interior point to an admissible face on the back face of the cube. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐾 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ℕ0)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 < 𝑁)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑀)⟶(0..^𝐾))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑀)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑀))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋((𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑀)) × {0}))) ∪ (((𝑀 + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵 → (⟨(𝑇 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), 0⟩}), (𝑈 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)⟩})⟩ ∈ (((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...(𝑀 + 1))) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...(𝑀 + 1))–1-1-onto→(1...(𝑀 + 1))}) ∧ (∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋(((𝑇 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), 0⟩}) ∘f + ((((𝑈 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)⟩}) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((𝑈 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)⟩}) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...(𝑀 + 1))) × {0}))) ∪ ((((𝑀 + 1) + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵 ∧ ((𝑇 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), 0⟩})‘(𝑀 + 1)) = 0 ∧ ((𝑈 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)⟩})‘(𝑀 + 1)) = (𝑀 + 1)))))
Theorem	poimirlem4 35790*	Lemma for poimir 35819 connecting the admissible faces on the back face of the (𝑀 + 1)-cube to admissible simplices in the 𝑀-cube. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐾 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ℕ0)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 < 𝑁)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑠 ∈ (((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑀)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑀)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑀)}) ∣ ∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋(((1st ‘𝑠) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘𝑠) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘𝑠) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑀)) × {0}))) ∪ (((𝑀 + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵} ≈ {𝑠 ∈ (((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...(𝑀 + 1))) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...(𝑀 + 1))–1-1-onto→(1...(𝑀 + 1))}) ∣ (∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋(((1st ‘𝑠) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘𝑠) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘𝑠) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...(𝑀 + 1))) × {0}))) ∪ ((((𝑀 + 1) + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵 ∧ ((1st ‘𝑠)‘(𝑀 + 1)) = 0 ∧ ((2nd ‘𝑠)‘(𝑀 + 1)) = (𝑀 + 1))})
Theorem	poimirlem5 35791*	Lemma for poimir 35819 to establish that, for the simplices defined by a walk along the edges of an 𝑁-cube, if the starting vertex is not opposite a given face, it is the earliest vertex of the face on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 0 < (2nd ‘𝑇))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹‘0) = (1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇)))
Theorem	poimirlem6 35792*	Lemma for poimir 35819 establishing, for a face of a simplex defined by a walk along the edges of an 𝑁-cube, the single dimension in which successive vertices before the opposite vertex differ. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (1...((2nd ‘𝑇) − 1)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 1))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘𝑀)‘𝑛)) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑀))
Theorem	poimirlem7 35793*	Lemma for poimir 35819, similar to poimirlem6 35792, but for vertices after the opposite vertex. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ((((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1) + 1)...𝑁))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 2))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 1))‘𝑛)) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑀))
Theorem	poimirlem8 35794*	Lemma for poimir 35819, establishing that away from the opposite vertex the walks in poimirlem9 35795 yield the same vertices. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)})) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)})))
Theorem	poimirlem9 35795*	Lemma for poimir 35819, establishing the two walks that yield a given face when the opposite vertex is neither first nor last. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) ≠ (2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ ({⟨(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)⟩, ⟨((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1), (2nd ‘𝑇)⟩} ∪ ( I ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)})))))
Theorem	poimirlem10 35796*	Lemma for poimir 35819 establishing the cube that yields the simplex that yields a face if the opposite vertex was first on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐹‘(𝑁 − 1)) ∘f − ((1...𝑁) × {1})) = (1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇)))
Theorem	poimirlem11 35797*	Lemma for poimir 35819 connecting walks that could yield from a given cube a given face opposite the first vertex of the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑈) = 0)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (1...𝑁))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) “ (1...𝑀)) ⊆ ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) “ (1...𝑀)))
Theorem	poimirlem12 35798*	Lemma for poimir 35819 connecting walks that could yield from a given cube a given face opposite the final vertex of the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 𝑁)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑈) = 𝑁)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) “ (1...𝑀)) ⊆ ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) “ (1...𝑀)))
Theorem	poimirlem13 35799*	Lemma for poimir 35819- for at most one simplex associated with a shared face is the opposite vertex first on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 (2nd ‘𝑧) = 0)
Theorem	poimirlem14 35800*	Lemma for poimir 35819- for at most one simplex associated with a shared face is the opposite vertex last on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 (2nd ‘𝑧) = 𝑁)