P. 369 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 36801-36900   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	bj-equsalhv 36801*	Version of equsalh 2419 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2371. Remark: this is the same as equsalhw 2291. TODO: delete after moving the following paragraph somewhere. Remarks: equsexvw 2005 has been moved to Main; Theorem ax13lem2 2375 has a DV version which is a simple consequence of ax5e 1912; Theorems nfeqf2 2376, dveeq2 2377, nfeqf1 2378, dveeq1 2379, nfeqf 2380, axc9 2381, ax13 2374, have dv versions which are simple consequences of ax-5 1910. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-axc11nv 36802*	Version of axc11n 2425 with a disjoint variable condition; instance of aevlem 2056. TODO: delete after checking surrounding theorems. (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥)
Theorem	bj-aecomsv 36803*	Version of aecoms 2427 with a disjoint variable condition, provable from Tarski's FOL. The corresponding version of naecoms 2428 should not be very useful since ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦, DV (𝑥, 𝑦) is true when the universe has at least two objects (see dtru 5399). (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-axc11v 36804*	Version of axc11 2429 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2371 nor ax-10 2142. Remark: the following theorems (hbae 2430, nfae 2432, hbnae 2431, nfnae 2433, hbnaes 2434) would need to be totally unbundled to be proved without ax-13 2371, hence would be simple consequences of ax-5 1910 or nfv 1914. (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	bj-drnf2v 36805*	Version of drnf2 2443 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-10 2142, ax-11 2158, ax-12 2178, ax-13 2371. Instance of nfbidv 1922. Note that the version of axc15 2421 with a disjoint variable condition is actually ax12v2 2180 (up to adding a superfluous antecedent). (Contributed by BJ, 17-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	bj-equs45fv 36806*	Version of equs45f 2458 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2371. Note that the version of equs5 2459 with a disjoint variable condition is actually sbalex 2243 (up to adding a superfluous antecedent). (Contributed by BJ, 11-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-hbs1 36807*	Version of hbsb2 2481 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2371, and removal of ax-13 2371 from hbs1 2274. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	bj-nfs1v 36808*	Version of nfsb2 2482 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2371, and removal of ax-13 2371 from nfs1v 2157. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	bj-hbsb2av 36809*	Version of hbsb2a 2483 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2371. (Contributed by BJ, 11-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	bj-hbsb3v 36810*	Version of hbsb3 2486 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2371. (Remark: the unbundled version of nfs1 2487 is given by bj-nfs1v 36808.) (Contributed by BJ, 11-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	bj-nfsab1 36811*	Remove dependency on ax-13 2371 from nfsab1 2716. UPDATE / TODO: nfsab1 2716 does not use ax-13 2371 either anymore; bj-nfsab1 36811 is shorter than nfsab1 2716 but uses ax-12 2178. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bj-dtrucor2v 36812*	Version of dtrucor2 5330 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2371 (nor ax-4 1809, ax-5 1910, ax-7 2008, ax-12 2178). (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)
21.19.4.13  Distinct var metavariables The closed formula ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝑥 = 𝑦 approximately means that the var metavariables 𝑥 and 𝑦 represent the same variable vi. In a domain with at most one object, however, this formula is always true, hence the "approximately" in the previous sentence.
Theorem	bj-hbaeb2 36813	Biconditional version of a form of hbae 2430 with commuted quantifiers, not requiring ax-11 2158. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑧 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	bj-hbaeb 36814	Biconditional version of hbae 2430. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	bj-hbnaeb 36815	Biconditional version of hbnae 2431 (to replace it?). (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	bj-dvv 36816	A special instance of bj-hbaeb2 36813. A lemma for distinct var metavariables. Note that the right-hand side is a closed formula (a sentence). (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦 𝑥 = 𝑦)
21.19.4.14  Around ~ equsal As a rule of thumb, if a theorem of the form ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) is in the database, and the "more precise" theorems ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) and ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜒) also hold (see bj-bisym 36585), then they should be added to the database. The present case is similar. Similar additions can be done regarding equsex 2417 (and equsalh 2419 and equsexh 2420). Even if only one of these two theorems holds, it should be added to the database.
Theorem	bj-equsal1t 36817	Duplication of wl-equsal1t 37537, with shorter proof. If one imposes a disjoint variable condition on x,y , then one can use alequexv 2001 and reduce axiom dependencies, and similarly for the following theorems. Note: wl-equsalcom 37538 is also interesting. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-equsal1ti 36818	Inference associated with bj-equsal1t 36817. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-equsal1 36819	One direction of equsal 2416. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-equsal2 36820	One direction of equsal 2416. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-equsal 36821	Shorter proof of equsal 2416. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.) Proof modification is discouraged to avoid using equsal 2416, but "min */exc equsal" is ok. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
21.19.4.15  Some Principia Mathematica proofs References are made to the second edition (1927, reprinted 1963) of Principia Mathematica, Vol. 1. Theorems are referred to in the form "PM*xx.xx".
Theorem	stdpc5t 36822	Closed form of stdpc5 2209. (Possible to place it before 19.21t 2207 and use it to prove 19.21t 2207). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-stdpc5 36823	More direct proof of stdpc5 2209. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	2stdpc5 36824	A double stdpc5 2209 (one direction of PM*11.3). See also 2stdpc4 2071 and 19.21vv 44372. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-19.21t0 36825	Proof of 19.21t 2207 from stdpc5t 36822. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	exlimii 36826	Inference associated with exlimi 2218. Inferring a theorem when it is implied by an antecedent which may be true. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜓
Theorem	ax11-pm 36827	Proof of ax-11 2158 similar to PM's proof of alcom 2160 (PM*11.2). For a proof closer to PM's proof, see ax11-pm2 36831. Axiom ax-11 2158 is used in the proof only through nfa2 2177. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	ax6er 36828	Commuted form of ax6e 2382. (Could be placed right after ax6e 2382). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.)
⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑥
Theorem	exlimiieq1 36829	Inferring a theorem when it is implied by an equality which may be true. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	exlimiieq2 36830	Inferring a theorem when it is implied by an equality which may be true. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	ax11-pm2 36831*	Proof of ax-11 2158 from the standard axioms of predicate calculus, similar to PM's proof of alcom 2160 (PM*11.2). This proof requires that 𝑥 and 𝑦 be distinct. Axiom ax-11 2158 is used in the proof only through nfal 2322, nfsb 2522, sbal 2170, sb8 2516. See also ax11-pm 36827. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑)
21.19.4.16  Alternate definition of substitution
Theorem	bj-sbsb 36832	Biconditional showing two possible (dual) definitions of substitution df-sb 2066 not using dummy variables. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2021.)
⊢ (((𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∧ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)) ↔ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∨ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	bj-dfsb2 36833	Alternate (dual) definition of substitution df-sb 2066 not using dummy variables. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2021.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∨ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)))
21.19.4.17  Lemmas for substitution
Theorem	bj-sbf3 36834	Substitution has no effect on a bound variable (existential quantifier case); see sbf2 2272. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	bj-sbf4 36835	Substitution has no effect on a bound variable (nonfreeness case); see sbf2 2272. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑)
21.19.4.18  Existential uniqueness
Theorem	bj-eu3f 36836*	Version of eu3v 2564 where the disjoint variable condition is replaced with a nonfreeness hypothesis. This is a "backup" of a theorem that used to be in the main part with label "eu3" and was deprecated in favor of eu3v 2564. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jul-1994.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
21.19.4.19  First-order logic: miscellaneous Miscellaneous theorems of first-order logic.
Theorem	bj-sblem1 36837*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-sblem2 36838*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓)) → ((∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜒) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-sblem 36839*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-sbievw1 36840*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-sbievw2 36841*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜓 → 𝜑) → (𝜓 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	bj-sbievw 36842*	Lemma for substitution. Closed form of equsalvw 2004 and sbievw 2094. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-sbievv 36843	Version of sbie 2501 with a second nonfreeness hypothesis and shorter proof. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Jul-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-moeub 36844	Uniqueness is equivalent to existence being equivalent to unique existence. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	bj-sbidmOLD 36845	Obsolete proof of sbidm 2509 temporarily kept here to check it gives no additional insight. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	bj-dvelimdv 36846*	Deduction form of dvelim 2450 with disjoint variable conditions. Uncurried (imported) form of bj-dvelimdv1 36847. Typically, 𝑧 is a fresh variable used for the implicit substitution hypothesis that results in 𝜒 (namely, 𝜓 can be thought as 𝜓(𝑥, 𝑦) and 𝜒 as 𝜓(𝑥, 𝑧)). So the theorem says that if x is effectively free in 𝜓(𝑥, 𝑧), then if x and y are not the same variable, then 𝑥 is also effectively free in 𝜓(𝑥, 𝑦), in a context 𝜑. One can weaken the implicit substitution hypothesis by adding the antecedent 𝜑 but this typically does not make the theorem much more useful. Similarly, one could use nonfreeness hypotheses instead of disjoint variable conditions but since this result is typically used when 𝑧 is a dummy variable, this would not be of much benefit. One could also remove DV (𝑥, 𝑧) since in the proof nfv 1914 can be replaced with nfal 2322 followed by nfn 1857. Remark: nfald 2327 uses ax-11 2158; it might be possible to inline and use ax11w 2131 instead, but there is still a use via 19.12 2326 anyway. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	bj-dvelimdv1 36847*	Curried (exported) form of bj-dvelimdv 36846 (of course, one is directly provable from the other, but we keep this proof for illustration purposes). (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-dvelimv 36848*	A version of dvelim 2450 using the "nonfree" idiom. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑))    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	bj-nfeel2 36849*	Nonfreeness in a membership statement. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 ∈ 𝑧)
Theorem	bj-axc14nf 36850	Proof of a version of axc14 2462 using the "nonfree" idiom. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑥 → (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	bj-axc14 36851	Alternate proof of axc14 2462 (even when inlining the above results, this gives a shorter proof). (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑥 → (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦)))
Theorem	mobidvALT 36852*	Alternate proof of mobidv 2543 directly from its analogues albidv 1920 and exbidv 1921, using deduction style. Note the proof structure, similar to mobi 2541. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) Reduce axiom dependencies and shorten proof. Remove dependency on ax-6 1967, ax-7 2008, ax-12 2178 by adapting proof of mobid 2544. (Revised by BJ, 26-Sep-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃*𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	sbn1ALT 36853	Alternate proof of sbn1 2108, not using the false constant. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Sep-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑡 / 𝑥] ¬ 𝜑 → ¬ [𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜑)
21.19.5  Set theory
21.19.5.1  Eliminability of class terms In this section, we give a sketch of the proof of the Eliminability Theorem for class terms in an extensional set theory where quantification occurs only over set variables. Eliminability of class variables using the $a-statements ax-ext 2702, df-clab 2709, df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804 is an easy result, proved for instance in Appendix X of Azriel Levy, Basic Set Theory, Dover Publications, 2002. Note that viewed from the set.mm axiomatization, it is a metatheorem not formalizable in set.mm. It states: every formula in the language of FOL + ∈ + class terms, but without class variables, is provably equivalent (over {FOL, ax-ext 2702, df-clab 2709, df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804 }) to a formula in the language of FOL + ∈ (that is, without class terms). The proof goes by induction on the complexity of the formula (see op. cit. for details). The base case is that of atomic formulas. The atomic formulas containing class terms are of one of the six following forms: for equality, 𝑥 = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑}, {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = 𝑦, {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}, and for membership, 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}, {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ 𝑦, {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}. These cases are dealt with by eliminable-veqab 36861, eliminable-abeqv 36862, eliminable-abeqab 36863, eliminable-velab 36860, eliminable-abelv 36864, eliminable-abelab 36865 respectively, which are all proved from {FOL, ax-ext 2702, df-clab 2709, df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804 }. (Details on the proof of the above six theorems. To understand how they were systematically proved, look at the theorems "eliminablei" below, which are special instances of df-clab 2709, dfcleq 2723 (proved from {FOL, ax-ext 2702, df-cleq 2722 }), and dfclel 2805 (proved from {FOL, df-clel 2804 }). Indeed, denote by (i) the formula proved by "eliminablei". One sees that the RHS of (1) has no class terms, the RHS's of (2x) have only class terms of the form dealt with by (1), and the RHS's of (3x) have only class terms of the forms dealt with by (1) and (2a). Note that in order to prove eliminable2a 36855, eliminable2b 36856 and eliminable3a 36858, we need to substitute a class variable for a setvar variable. This is possible because setvars are class terms: this is the content of the syntactic theorem cv 1539, which is used in these proofs (this does not appear in the html pages but it is in the set.mm file and you can check it using the Metamath program).) The induction step relies on the fact that any formula is a FOL-combination of atomic formulas, so if one found equivalents for all atomic formulas constituting the formula, then the same FOL-combination of these equivalents will be equivalent to the original formula. Note that one has a slightly more precise result: if the original formula has only class terms appearing in atomic formulas of the form 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}, then df-clab 2709 is sufficient (over FOL) to eliminate class terms, and if the original formula has only class terms appearing in atomic formulas of the form 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} and equalities, then df-clab 2709, ax-ext 2702 and df-cleq 2722 are sufficient (over FOL) to eliminate class terms. To prove that { df-clab 2709, df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804 } provides a definitional extension of {FOL, ax-ext 2702 }, one needs to prove both the above Eliminability Theorem, which compares the expressive powers of the languages with and without class terms, and the Conservativity Theorem, which compares the deductive powers when one adds { df-clab 2709, df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804 }. It states that a formula without class terms is provable in one axiom system if and only if it is provable in the other, and that this remains true when one adds further definitions to {FOL, ax-ext 2702 }. It is also proved in op. cit. The proof is more difficult, since one has to construct for each proof of a statement without class terms, an associated proof not using { df-clab 2709, df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804 }. It involves a careful case study on the structure of the proof tree.
Theorem	eliminable1 36854	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	eliminable2a 36855*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑}))
Theorem	eliminable2b 36856*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	eliminable2c 36857*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝑧 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}))
Theorem	eliminable3a 36858*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑧(𝑧 = {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	eliminable3b 36859*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∃𝑧(𝑧 = {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∧ 𝑧 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}))
Theorem	eliminable-velab 36860	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): variable belongs to abstraction. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	eliminable-veqab 36861*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): variable equals abstraction. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑))
Theorem	eliminable-abeqv 36862*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): abstraction equals variable. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) Beware not to use symmetry of class equality. (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧([𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	eliminable-abeqab 36863*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): abstraction equals abstraction. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑧([𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜓))
Theorem	eliminable-abelv 36864*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): abstraction belongs to variable. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑧(∀𝑡(𝑡 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ [𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜑) ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	eliminable-abelab 36865*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): abstraction belongs to abstraction. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∃𝑧(∀𝑡(𝑡 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ [𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜑) ∧ [𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜓))
21.19.5.2  Classes without the axiom of extensionality A few results about classes can be proved without using ax-ext 2702. One could move all theorems from cab 2708 to df-clel 2804 (except for dfcleq 2723 and cvjust 2724) in a subsection "Classes" before the subsection on the axiom of extensionality, together with the theorems below. In that subsection, the last statement should be df-cleq 2722. Note that without ax-ext 2702, the $a-statements df-clab 2709, df-cleq 2722, and df-clel 2804 are no longer eliminable (see previous section) (but PROBABLY df-clab 2709 is still conservative , while df-cleq 2722 and df-clel 2804 are not). This is not a reason not to study what is provable with them but without ax-ext 2702, in order to gauge their strengths more precisely. Before that subsection, a subsection "The membership predicate" could group the statements with ∈ that are currently in the FOL part (including wcel 2109, wel 2110, ax-8 2111, ax-9 2119). Remark: the weakening of eleq1 2817 / eleq2 2818 to eleq1w 2812 / eleq2w 2813 can also be done with eleq1i 2820, eqeltri 2825, eqeltrri 2826, eleq1a 2824, eleq1d 2814, eqeltrd 2829, eqeltrrd 2830, eqneltrd 2849, eqneltrrd 2850, nelneq 2853. Remark: possibility to remove dependency on ax-10 2142, ax-11 2158, ax-13 2371 from nfcri 2884 and theorems using it if one adds a disjoint variable condition (that theorem is typically used with dummy variables, so the disjoint variable condition addition is not very restrictive), and then shorten nfnfc 2905.
Theorem	bj-denoteslem 36866*	Duplicate of issettru 2807 and bj-issettruALTV 36868. Lemma for bj-denotesALTV 36867. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ ⊤})
Theorem	bj-denotesALTV 36867*	Moved to main as iseqsetv-clel 2808 and kept for the comments. This would be the justification theorem for the definition of the unary predicate "E!" by ⊢ ( E! 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑥𝑥 = 𝐴) which could be interpreted as "𝐴 exists" (as a set) or "𝐴 denotes" (in the sense of free logic). A shorter proof using bitri 275 (to add an intermediate proposition ∃𝑧𝑧 = 𝐴 with a fresh 𝑧), cbvexvw 2037, and eqeq1 2734, requires the core axioms and { ax-9 2119, ax-ext 2702, df-cleq 2722 } whereas this proof requires the core axioms and { ax-8 2111, df-clab 2709, df-clel 2804 }. Theorem bj-issetwt 36870 proves that "existing" is equivalent to being a member of a class abstraction. It also requires, with the present proof, { ax-8 2111, df-clab 2709, df-clel 2804 } (whereas with the shorter proof from cbvexvw 2037 and eqeq1 2734 it would require { ax-8 2111, ax-9 2119, ax-ext 2702, df-clab 2709, df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804 }). That every class is equal to a class abstraction is proved by abid1 2865, which requires { ax-8 2111, ax-9 2119, ax-ext 2702, df-clab 2709, df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804 }. Note that there is no disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑦 but the theorem does not depend on ax-13 2371. Actually, the proof depends only on the logical axioms ax-1 6 through ax-7 2008 and sp 2184. The symbol "E!" was chosen to be reminiscent of the analogous predicate in (inclusive or non-inclusive) free logic, which deals with the possibility of nonexistent objects. This analogy should not be taken too far, since here there are no equality axioms for classes: these are derived from ax-ext 2702 and df-cleq 2722 (e.g., eqid 2730 and eqeq1 2734). In particular, one cannot even prove ⊢ ∃𝑥𝑥 = 𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐴 without ax-ext 2702 and df-cleq 2722. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Apr-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑦 𝑦 = 𝐴)
Theorem	bj-issettruALTV 36868*	Moved to main as issettru 2807 and kept for the comments. Weak version of isset 3464 without ax-ext 2702. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ ⊤})
Theorem	bj-elabtru 36869	This is as close as we can get to proving extensionality for "the" "universal" class without ax-ext 2702. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ ⊤} ↔ 𝐴 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ ⊤})
Theorem	bj-issetwt 36870*	Closed form of bj-issetw 36871. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Apr-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → (𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∃𝑦 𝑦 = 𝐴))
Theorem	bj-issetw 36871*	The closest one can get to isset 3464 without using ax-ext 2702. See also vexw 2714. Note that the only disjoint variable condition is between 𝑦 and 𝐴. From there, one can prove isset 3464 using eleq2i 2821 (which requires ax-ext 2702 and df-cleq 2722). (Contributed by BJ, 29-Apr-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∃𝑦 𝑦 = 𝐴)
Theorem	bj-issetiv 36872*	Version of bj-isseti 36873 with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑉. The hypothesis uses 𝑉 instead of V for extra generality. This is indeed more general than isseti 3468 as long as elex 3471 is not available (and the non-dependence of bj-issetiv 36872 on special properties of the universal class V is obvious). Prefer its use over bj-isseti 36873 when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 14-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴
Theorem	bj-isseti 36873*	Version of isseti 3468 with a class variable 𝑉 in the hypothesis instead of V for extra generality. This is indeed more general than isseti 3468 as long as elex 3471 is not available (and the non-dependence of bj-isseti 36873 on special properties of the universal class V is obvious). Use bj-issetiv 36872 instead when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 13-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴
Theorem	bj-ralvw 36874	A weak version of ralv 3477 not using ax-ext 2702 (nor df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804, df-v 3452), and only core FOL axioms. See also bj-rexvw 36875. The analogues for reuv 3479 and rmov 3480 are not proved. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	bj-rexvw 36875	A weak version of rexv 3478 not using ax-ext 2702 (nor df-cleq 2722, df-clel 2804, df-v 3452), and only core FOL axioms. See also bj-ralvw 36874. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	bj-rababw 36876	A weak version of rabab 3481 not using df-clel 2804 nor df-v 3452 (but requiring ax-ext 2702) nor ax-12 2178. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bj-rexcom4bv 36877*	Version of rexcom4b 3482 and bj-rexcom4b 36878 with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑉, hence removing dependency on df-sb 2066 and df-clab 2709 (so that it depends on df-clel 2804 and df-rex 3055 only on top of first-order logic). Prefer its use over bj-rexcom4b 36878 when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). Note the 𝑉 in the hypothesis instead of V. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝐵) ↔ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-rexcom4b 36878*	Remove from rexcom4b 3482 dependency on ax-ext 2702 and ax-13 2371 (and on df-or 848, df-cleq 2722, df-nfc 2879, df-v 3452). The hypothesis uses 𝑉 instead of V (see bj-isseti 36873 for the motivation). Use bj-rexcom4bv 36877 instead when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝐵) ↔ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-ceqsalt0 36879	The FOL content of ceqsalt 3484. Lemma for bj-ceqsalt 36881 and bj-ceqsaltv 36882. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜃 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ ∃𝑥𝜃) → (∀𝑥(𝜃 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalt1 36880	The FOL content of ceqsalt 3484. Lemma for bj-ceqsalt 36881 and bj-ceqsaltv 36882. TODO: consider removing if it does not add anything to bj-ceqsalt0 36879. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜃 → ∃𝑥𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ 𝜃) → (∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalt 36881*	Remove from ceqsalt 3484 dependency on ax-ext 2702 (and on df-cleq 2722 and df-v 3452). Note: this is not doable with ceqsralt 3485 (or ceqsralv 3491), which uses eleq1 2817, but the same dependence removal is possible for ceqsalg 3486, ceqsal 3488, ceqsalv 3490, cgsexg 3495, cgsex2g 3496, cgsex4g 3497, ceqsex 3499, ceqsexv 3501, ceqsex2 3504, ceqsex2v 3505, ceqsex3v 3506, ceqsex4v 3507, ceqsex6v 3508, ceqsex8v 3509, gencbvex 3510 (after changing 𝐴 = 𝑦 to 𝑦 = 𝐴), gencbvex2 3511, gencbval 3512, vtoclgft 3521 (it uses Ⅎ, whose justification nfcjust 2878 does not use ax-ext 2702) and several other vtocl* theorems (see for instance bj-vtoclg1f 36913). See also bj-ceqsaltv 36882. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsaltv 36882*	Version of bj-ceqsalt 36881 with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑉, removing dependency on df-sb 2066 and df-clab 2709. Prefer its use over bj-ceqsalt 36881 when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalg0 36883	The FOL content of ceqsalg 3486. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜒 → (∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalg 36884*	Remove from ceqsalg 3486 dependency on ax-ext 2702 (and on df-cleq 2722 and df-v 3452). See also bj-ceqsalgv 36886. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalgALT 36885*	Alternate proof of bj-ceqsalg 36884. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalgv 36886*	Version of bj-ceqsalg 36884 with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑉, removing dependency on df-sb 2066 and df-clab 2709. Prefer its use over bj-ceqsalg 36884 when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalgvALT 36887*	Alternate proof of bj-ceqsalgv 36886. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsal 36888*	Remove from ceqsal 3488 dependency on ax-ext 2702 (and on df-cleq 2722, df-v 3452, df-clab 2709, df-sb 2066). (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-ceqsalv 36889*	Remove from ceqsalv 3490 dependency on ax-ext 2702 (and on df-cleq 2722, df-v 3452, df-clab 2709, df-sb 2066). (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-spcimdv 36890*	Remove from spcimdv 3562 dependency on ax-9 2119, ax-10 2142, ax-11 2158, ax-13 2371, ax-ext 2702, df-cleq 2722 (and df-nfc 2879, df-v 3452, df-or 848, df-tru 1543, df-nf 1784). For an even more economical version, see bj-spcimdvv 36891. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝐴) → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒))
Theorem	bj-spcimdvv 36891*	Remove from spcimdv 3562 dependency on ax-7 2008, ax-8 2111, ax-10 2142, ax-11 2158, ax-12 2178 ax-13 2371, ax-ext 2702, df-cleq 2722, df-clab 2709 (and df-nfc 2879, df-v 3452, df-or 848, df-tru 1543, df-nf 1784) at the price of adding a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝐵 (but in usages, 𝑥 is typically a dummy, hence fresh, variable). For the version without this disjoint variable condition, see bj-spcimdv 36890. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Nov-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝐴) → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒))
21.19.5.3  Characterization among sets versus among classes
Theorem	elelb 36892	Equivalence between two common ways to characterize elements of a class 𝐵: the LHS says that sets are elements of 𝐵 if and only if they satisfy 𝜑 while the RHS says that classes are elements of 𝐵 if and only if they are sets and satisfy 𝜑. Therefore, the LHS is a characterization among sets while the RHS is a characterization among classes. Note that the LHS is often formulated using a class variable instead of the universe V while this is not possible for the RHS (apart from using 𝐵 itself, which would not be very useful). (Contributed by BJ, 26-Feb-2023.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ V → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ 𝜑)) ↔ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ (𝐴 ∈ V ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	bj-pwvrelb 36893	Characterization of the elements of the powerclass of the cartesian square of the universal class: they are exactly the sets which are binary relations. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 (V × V) ↔ (𝐴 ∈ V ∧ Rel 𝐴))
21.19.5.4  The nonfreeness quantifier for classes In this section, we prove the symmetry of the nonfreeness quantifier for classes.
Theorem	bj-nfcsym 36894	The nonfreeness quantifier for classes defines a symmetric binary relation on var metavariables (irreflexivity is proved by nfnid 5333 with additional axioms; see also nfcv 2892). This could be proved from aecom 2426 and nfcvb 5334 but the latter requires a domain with at least two objects (hence uses extra axioms). (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.) Proof modification is discouraged to avoid use of eqcomd 2736 instead of equcomd 2019; removing dependency on ax-ext 2702 is possible: prove weak versions (i.e. replace classes with setvars) of drnfc1 2912, eleq2d 2815 (using elequ2 2124), nfcvf 2919, dvelimc 2918, dvelimdc 2917, nfcvf2 2920. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝑦 ↔ Ⅎ𝑦𝑥)
21.19.5.5  Lemmas for class substitution Some useful theorems for dealing with substitutions: sbbi 2307, sbcbig 3808, sbcel1g 4382, sbcel2 4384, sbcel12 4377, sbceqg 4378, csbvarg 4400.
Theorem	bj-sbeqALT 36895*	Substitution in an equality (use the more general version bj-sbeq 36896 instead, without disjoint variable condition). (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝐴 = 𝐵 ↔ ⦋𝑦 / 𝑥⦌𝐴 = ⦋𝑦 / 𝑥⦌𝐵)
Theorem	bj-sbeq 36896	Distribute proper substitution through an equality relation. (See sbceqg 4378). (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝐴 = 𝐵 ↔ ⦋𝑦 / 𝑥⦌𝐴 = ⦋𝑦 / 𝑥⦌𝐵)
Theorem	bj-sbceqgALT 36897	Distribute proper substitution through an equality relation. Alternate proof of sbceqg 4378. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) Proof modification is discouraged to avoid using sbceqg 4378, but the Metamath program "MM-PA> MINIMIZE_WITH * / EXCEPT sbceqg" command is ok. (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝐵 = 𝐶 ↔ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵 = ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐶))
Theorem	bj-csbsnlem 36898*	Lemma for bj-csbsn 36899 (in this lemma, 𝑥 cannot occur in 𝐴). (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌{𝑥} = {𝐴}
Theorem	bj-csbsn 36899	Substitution in a singleton. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌{𝑥} = {𝐴}
Theorem	bj-sbel1 36900*	Version of sbcel1g 4382 when substituting a set. (Note: one could have a corresponding version of sbcel12 4377 when substituting a set, but the point here is that the antecedent of sbcel1g 4382 is not needed when substituting a set.) (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ ⦋𝑦 / 𝑥⦌𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)