P. 370 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 36901-37000   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
21.19.1.9  Propositional calculus: miscellaneous Miscellaneous theorems of propositional calculus.
Theorem	bj-imbi12 36901	Uncurried (imported) form of imbi12 347. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) → ((𝜑 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜃)))
Theorem	bj-falor 36902	Dual of truan 1558 (which has biconditional reversed). (Contributed by BJ, 26-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (⊥ ∨ 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-falor2 36903	Dual of truan 1558. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((⊥ ∨ 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-bibibi 36904	A property of the biconditional. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-imn3ani 36905	Duplication of bnj1224 34990. Three-fold version of imnani 401. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) (Revised by BJ, 22-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜒)
Theorem	bj-andnotim 36906	Two ways of expressing a certain ternary connective. Note the respective positions of the three formulas on each side of the biconditional. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∨ 𝜒))
Theorem	bj-bi3ant 36907	This used to be in the main part. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 14-May-2013.) (Revised by BJ, 14-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (((𝜃 → 𝜏) → 𝜑) → (((𝜏 → 𝜃) → 𝜓) → ((𝜃 ↔ 𝜏) → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-bisym 36908	This used to be in the main part. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 14-May-2013.) (Revised by BJ, 14-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → (((𝜓 → 𝜑) → (𝜃 → 𝜒)) → ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))))
Theorem	bj-bixor 36909	Equivalence of two ternary operations. Note the identical order and parenthesizing of the three arguments in both expressions. (Contributed by BJ, 31-Dec-2023.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ⊻ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 ⊻ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))
21.19.2  Modal logic In this section, we prove some theorems related to modal logic. For modal logic, we refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kripke_semantics, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_logic and https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-modal/. Monadic first-order logic (i.e., with quantification over only one variable) is bi-interpretable with modal logic, by mapping ∀𝑥 to "necessity" (generally denoted by a box) and ∃𝑥 to "possibility" (generally denoted by a diamond). Therefore, we use these quantifiers so as not to introduce new symbols. (To be strictly within modal logic, we should add disjoint variable conditions between 𝑥 and any other metavariables appearing in the statements.) For instance, ax-gen 1802 corresponds to the necessitation rule of modal logic, and ax-4 1816 corresponds to the distributivity axiom (K) of modal logic, also called the Kripke scheme. Modal logics satisfying these rule and axiom are called "normal modal logics", of which the most important modal logics are. The minimal normal modal logic is also denoted by (K). Here are a few normal modal logics with their axiomatizations (on top of (K)): (K) axiomatized by no supplementary axioms; (T) axiomatized by the axiom T; (K4) axiomatized by the axiom 4; (S4) axiomatized by the axioms T,4; (S5) axiomatized by the axioms T,5 or D,B,4; (GL) axiomatized by the axiom GL. The last one, called Gödel–Löb logic or provability logic, is important because it describes exactly the properties of provability in Peano arithmetic, as proved by Robert Solovay. See for instance https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-provability/ 1816. A basic result in this logic is bj-gl4 36913.
Theorem	bj-axdd2 36910	This implication, proved using only ax-gen 1802 and ax-4 1816 on top of propositional calculus (hence holding, up to the standard interpretation, in any normal modal logic), shows that the axiom scheme ⊢ ∃𝑥⊤ implies the axiom scheme ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜑). These correspond to the modal axiom (D), and in predicate calculus, they assert that the universe of discourse is nonempty. For the converse, see bj-axd2d 36911. (Contributed by BJ, 16-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-axd2d 36911	This implication, proved using only ax-gen 1802 on top of propositional calculus (hence holding, up to the standard interpretation, in any modal logic), shows that the axiom scheme ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜑) implies the axiom scheme ⊢ ∃𝑥⊤ (substitute ⊤ for 𝜑). These correspond to the modal axiom (D), and in predicate calculus, they assert that the universe of discourse is nonempty. For the converse, see bj-axdd2 36910. (Contributed by BJ, 16-May-2019.) Generalize from its instance with ⊤ substituted for 𝜑. (Revised by BJ, 20-Mar-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥⊤ → ∃𝑥𝜑) → ∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	bj-axtd 36912	This implication, proved from propositional calculus only (hence holding, up to the standard interpretation, in any modal logic), shows that the axiom scheme ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) (modal T) implies the axiom scheme ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜑) (modal D). See also bj-axdd2 36910 and bj-axd2d 36911. (Contributed by BJ, 16-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜑 → ¬ 𝜑) → ((∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜑)))
Theorem	bj-gl4 36913	In a normal modal logic, the modal axiom GL implies the modal axiom (4). Translated to first-order logic, Axiom GL reads ⊢ (∀𝑥(∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) → ∀𝑥𝜑). Note that the antecedent of bj-gl4 36913 is an instance of the axiom GL, with 𝜑 replaced by (∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜑), which is a modality sometimes called the "strong necessity" of 𝜑. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥(∀𝑥(∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜑) → (∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜑)) → ∀𝑥(∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜑)) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	bj-axc4 36914	Over minimal calculus, the modal axiom (4) (hba1 2304) and the modal axiom (K) (ax-4 1816) together imply axc4 2330. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Nov-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑥𝜑) → ((∀𝑥(∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) → (∀𝑥(∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓))))
21.19.3  Provability logic In this section, we assume that, on top of propositional calculus, there is given a provability predicate Prv satisfying the three axioms ax-prv1 36916 and ax-prv2 36917 and ax-prv3 36918. Note the similarity with ax-gen 1802, ax-4 1816 and hba1 2304 respectively. These three properties of Prv are often called the Hilbert–Bernays–Löb derivability conditions, or the Hilbert–Bernays provability conditions. This corresponds to the modal logic (K4) (see previous section for modal logic). The interpretation of provability logic is the following: we are given a background first-order theory T, the wff Prv 𝜑 means "𝜑 is provable in T", and the turnstile ⊢ indicates provability in T. Beware that "provability logic" often means (K) augmented with the Gödel–Löb axiom GL, which we do not assume here (at least for the moment). See for instance https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-provability/ 2304. Provability logic is worth studying because whenever T is a first-order theory containing Robinson arithmetic (a fragment of Peano arithmetic), one can prove (using Gödel numbering, and in the much weaker primitive recursive arithmetic) that there exists in T a provability predicate Prv satisfying the above three axioms. (We do not construct this predicate in this section; this is still a project.) The main theorems of this section are the "easy parts" of the proofs of Gödel's second incompleteness theorem (bj-babygodel 36921) and Löb's theorem (bj-babylob 36922). See the comments of these theorems for details.
Syntax	cprvb 36915	Syntax for the provability predicate.
wff Prv 𝜑
Axiom	ax-prv1 36916	First property of three of the provability predicate. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ Prv 𝜑
Axiom	ax-prv2 36917	Second property of three of the provability predicate. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (Prv (𝜑 → 𝜓) → (Prv 𝜑 → Prv 𝜓))
Axiom	ax-prv3 36918	Third property of three of the provability predicate. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (Prv 𝜑 → Prv Prv 𝜑)
Theorem	prvlem1 36919	An elementary property of the provability predicate. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (Prv 𝜑 → Prv 𝜓)
Theorem	prvlem2 36920	An elementary property of the provability predicate. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (Prv 𝜑 → (Prv 𝜓 → Prv 𝜒))
Theorem	bj-babygodel 36921	See the section header comments for the context. The first hypothesis reads "𝜑 is true if and only if it is not provable in T" (and having this first hypothesis means that we can prove this fact in T). The wff 𝜑 is a formal version of the sentence "This sentence is not provable". The hard part of the proof of Gödel's theorem is to construct such a 𝜑, called a "Gödel–Rosser sentence", for a first-order theory T which is effectively axiomatizable and contains Robinson arithmetic, through Gödel diagonalization (this can be done in primitive recursive arithmetic). The second hypothesis means that ⊥ is not provable in T, that is, that the theory T is consistent (and having this second hypothesis means that we can prove in T that the theory T is consistent). The conclusion is the falsity, so having the conclusion means that T can prove the falsity, that is, T is inconsistent. Therefore, taking the contrapositive, this theorem expresses that if a first-order theory is consistent (and one can prove in it that some formula is true if and only if it is not provable in it), then this theory does not prove its own consistency. This proof is due to George Boolos, Gödel's Second Incompleteness Theorem Explained in Words of One Syllable, Mind, New Series, Vol. 103, No. 409 (January 1994), pp. 1--3. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ Prv 𝜑)    &   ⊢ ¬ Prv ⊥    ⇒   ⊢ ⊥
Theorem	bj-babylob 36922	See the section header comments for the context, as well as the comments for bj-babygodel 36921. Löb's theorem when the Löb sentence is given as a hypothesis (the hard part of the proof of Löb's theorem is to construct this Löb sentence; this can be done, using Gödel diagonalization, for any first-order effectively axiomatizable theory containing Robinson arithmetic). More precisely, the present theorem states that if a first-order theory proves that the provability of a given sentence entails its truth (and if one can construct in this theory a provability predicate and a Löb sentence, given here as the first hypothesis), then the theory actually proves that sentence. See for instance, Eliezer Yudkowsky, The Cartoon Guide to Löb's Theorem (available at http://yudkowsky.net/rational/lobs-theorem/ 36921). (Contributed by BJ, 20-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (𝜓 ↔ (Prv 𝜓 → 𝜑))    &   ⊢ (Prv 𝜑 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	bj-godellob 36923	Proof of Gödel's theorem from Löb's theorem (see comments at bj-babygodel 36921 and bj-babylob 36922 for details). (Contributed by BJ, 20-Apr-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ Prv 𝜑)    &   ⊢ ¬ Prv ⊥    ⇒   ⊢ ⊥
21.19.4  First-order logic Utility lemmas or strengthenings of theorems in the main part (biconditional or closed forms, or fewer disjoint variable conditions, or disjoint variable conditions replaced with nonfreeness hypotheses...). Sorted in the same order as in the main part.
21.19.4.1  Universal and existential quantifiers, nonfreeness predicate
Theorem	bj-exexalal 36924	A lemma for changing bound variables. Only the forward implication is intuitionistic. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Mar-2026.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑦𝜓) ↔ (∀𝑦 ¬ 𝜓 → ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜑))
21.19.4.2  Adding ax-gen
Theorem	bj-genr 36925	Generalization rule on the right conjunct. See 19.28 2240. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	bj-genl 36926	Generalization rule on the left conjunct. See 19.27 2239. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-genan 36927	Generalization rule on a conjunction. Forward inference associated with 19.26 1877. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	bj-mpgs 36928	From a closed form theorem (the major premise) with an antecedent in the "strong necessity" modality (in the language of modal logic), deduce the associated inference. Strong necessity is stronger than necessity, and equivalent to it when sp 2195 (modal T) is available. Therefore, this theorem is stronger than mpg 1804, and strictly stronger when sp 2195 is not available. (Contributed by BJ, 1-Nov-2023.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜑) → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜓
21.19.4.3  Adding ax-4
Theorem	bj-almp 36929	A quantified form of ax-mp 5. See also barbara 2667, bj-ala1i 36936, bj-almpi 36937. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2026.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜑)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜑
Theorem	bj-sylggt 36930	Stronger form of sylgt 1829, closer to ax-2 7. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Jul-2025.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒)) → ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-alrimg 36931	The general form of the *alrim* family of theorems: if 𝜑 is substituted for 𝜓, then the antecedent expresses a form of nonfreeness of 𝑥 in 𝜑, so the theorem means that under a nonfreeness condition in an antecedent, one can deduce from the universally quantified implication an implication where the consequent is universally quantified. Dual of bj-exlimg 36953. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) → (∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-sylgt2 36932	Uncurried (imported) form of sylgt 1829. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒) ∧ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	bj-nexdh 36933	Closed form of nexdh 1872 (actually, its general instance). (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) → ((𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → (𝜒 → ¬ ∃𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-nexdh2 36934	Uncurried (imported) form of bj-nexdh 36933. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) → (𝜒 → ¬ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-alimii 36935	Inference associated with alimi 1818. Double inference associated with alim 1817. The usual proof of an associated inference (here from alimi 1818 and ax-mp 5) has the same size and same number of steps. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2026.)
⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜑)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜑
Theorem	bj-ala1i 36936	Add an antecedent in a universally quantified formula. Inference associated with ala1 1820. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ ∀𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-almpi 36937	A quantified form of mpi 20. See also barbara 2667, bj-ala1i 36936, bj-almp 36929. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2026.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓))    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-almpig 36938	A partially quantified form of mpi 20 similar to bj-almpi 36937. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2026.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓))    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-alsyl 36939	Syllogism under the universal quantifier, in the curried form appearing as Theorem *10.3 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 145. See alsyl 1900 for the uncurried form. (Contributed by BJ, 28-Mar-2026.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-2alim 36940	Closed form of 2alimi 1819. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-alimdh 36941	General instance of alimdh 1824. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2002.) State the most general derivable instance. (Revised by BJ, 5-Apr-2026.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜃))
Theorem	bj-alrimdh 36942	Deduction form of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90, see 19.21 2219 and 19.21h 2298. (Contributed by NM, 10-Feb-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) State the most general derivable instance. (Revised by BJ, 5-Apr-2026.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜃)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜏))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜏))
Theorem	bj-alrimd 36943	A slightly more general alrimd 2227. A common usage will have 𝜑 substituted for 𝜓 and 𝜒 substituted for 𝜃, giving a form closer to alrimd 2227. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜏))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜏))
Theorem	bj-exa1i 36944	Add an antecedent in an existentially quantified formula. Inference associated with exa1 1845. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-alanim 36945	Closed form of alanimi 1823. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) → ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ∀𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	bj-2albi 36946	Closed form of 2albii 1827. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-notalbii 36947	Equivalence of universal quantification of negation of equivalent formulas. Shortens ab0 4315 (103>94), ballotlem2 34680 (2655>2648), bnj1143 34979 (522>519), hausdiag 23635 (2119>2104). (Contributed by BJ, 17-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-2exim 36948	Closed form of 2eximi 1843. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-2exbi 36949	Closed form of 2exbii 1856. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-3exbi 36950	Closed form of 3exbii 1857. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	bj-sylget 36951	Dual statement of sylgt 1829. Closed form of bj-sylge 36954. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑) → ((∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜒 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-sylget2 36952	Uncurried (imported) form of bj-sylget 36951. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜒))
Theorem	bj-exlimg 36953	The general form of the *exlim* family of theorems: if 𝜑 is substituted for 𝜓, then the antecedent expresses a form of nonfreeness of 𝑥 in 𝜑, so the theorem means that under a nonfreeness condition in a consequent, one can deduce from the universally quantified implication an implication where the antecedent is existentially quantified. Dual of bj-alrimg 36931. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑) → (∃𝑥𝜒 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-sylge 36954	Dual statement of sylg 1830 (the final "e" in the label stands for "existential (version of sylg 1830)". Variant of exlimih 2300. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜒 → 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-exlimd 36955	A slightly more general exlimd 2230. A common usage will have 𝜑 substituted for 𝜓 and 𝜃 substituted for 𝜏, giving a form closer to exlimd 2230. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜃 → 𝜏))    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜒 → 𝜏))
Theorem	bj-nfimexal 36956	A weak from of nonfreeness in either an antecedent or a consequent implies that a universally quantified implication is equivalent to the associated implication where the antecedent is existentially quantified and the consequent is universally quantified. The forward implication always holds (this is 19.38 1846) and the converse implication is the join of instances of bj-alrimg 36931 and bj-exlimg 36953 (see 19.38a 1847 and 19.38b 1848). TODO: prove a version where the antecedents use the nonfreeness quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (((∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ∨ (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) → ((∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-exim 36957	Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p. 90. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jul-2014.) Prove it directly from alim 1817 to allow use in bj-alexim 36958. (Revised by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-alexim 36958	Closed form of aleximi 1839. Note: this proof is shorter, so aleximi 1839 could be deduced from it (exim 1841 would have to be proved first, see bj-exim 36957). (Contributed by BJ, 8-Nov-2021.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-aleximiALT 36959	Alternate proof of aleximi 1839 from exim 1841, which is sometimes used as an axiom in instuitionistic modal logic. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	bj-hbxfrbi 36960	Closed form of hbxfrbi 1832. Note: it is less important than nfbiit 1858. The antecedent is in the "strong necessity" modality of modal logic (see also bj-nnftht 37093) in order not to require sp 2195 (modal T). See bj-hbyfrbi 36961 for its version with existential quantifiers. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) → ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ↔ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-hbyfrbi 36961	Version of bj-hbxfrbi 36960 with existential quantifiers. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Aug-2023.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) → ((∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-exalim 36962	Distribute quantifiers over a nested implication. This and the following theorems are the general instances of already proved theorems. They could be moved to the main part, before ax-5 1917. I propose to move to the main part: bj-exalim 36962, bj-exalimi 36963, bj-eximcom 36964 bj-exalims 36965, bj-exalimsi 36966, bj-ax12i 36969, bj-ax12wlem 36992, bj-ax12w 37025. A new label is needed for bj-ax12i 36969 and label suggestions are welcome for the others. I also propose to change ¬ ∀𝑥¬ to ∃𝑥 in speimfw 1970 and spimfw 1972 (other spim* theorems use ∃𝑥 and very few theorems in set.mm use ¬ ∀𝑥¬). (Contributed by BJ, 8-Nov-2021.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-exalimi 36963	An inference for distributing quantifiers over a nested implication. The canonical derivation from its closed form bj-exalim 36962 (using mpg 1804) has fewer essential steps, but more steps in total (yielding a longer compressed proof). (Almost) the general statement that speimfw 1970 proves. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	bj-eximcom 36964	A commuted form of exim 1841 which is sometimes posited as an axiom in instuitionistic modal logic. Forward implication of 19.35 1884. Its converse is not intuitionistic. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-exalims 36965	Distributing quantifiers over a nested implication. (Almost) the general statement that spimfw 1972 proves. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (¬ 𝜒 → ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-exalimsi 36966	An inference for distributing quantifiers over a nested implication. (Almost) the general statement that spimfw 1972 proves. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (¬ 𝜒 → ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒))
Theorem	bj-axdd2ALT 36967	Alternate proof of bj-axdd2 36910 (this should replace bj-axdd2 36910 when bj-exalimi 36963 is moved to the main section). (Contributed by BJ, 8-Mar-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ax12ig 36968	A lemma used to prove a weak form of the axiom of substitution. A generalization of bj-ax12i 36969. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Dec-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-ax12i 36969	A weakening of bj-ax12ig 36968 that is sufficient to prove a weak form of the axiom of substitution ax-12 2189. The general statement of which ax12i 1973 is an instance. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-nfimt 36970	Closed form of nfim 1903 and curried (exported) form of nfimt 1902. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) Proof should not use 19.35 1884. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-spimnfe 36971	A universal specification result: if 𝜑 is true for all values of 𝑥 and implies 𝜓 for at least one value, and if furthermore 𝑥 is ∃-weakly nonfree in 𝜓, then 𝜓 follows. An intermediate result on the way to prove 19.36i 2243, bj-19.36im 37113, 19.36imv 1952, spimfw 1972... (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2026.) Proof should not use 19.35 1884. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-spimenfa 36972	An existential generalization result: if 𝜑 holds and implies 𝜓 for at least one value of 𝑥, and if furthermore 𝑥 is ∀ -weakly nonfree in 𝜑, then 𝜓 holds for at least one value of 𝑥. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2026.) Proof should not use 19.35 1884. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-spim 36973	A lemma for universal specification. In applications, 𝑥 = 𝑦 will be substituted for 𝜓 and ax6ev 1976 will prove Hypothesis bj-spim.denote. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜃 → 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜒 → 𝜃))
Theorem	bj-spime 36974	A lemma for existential generalization. In applications, 𝑥 = 𝑦 will be substituted for 𝜓 and ax6ev 1976 will prove Hypothesis bj-spime.denote. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∃𝑥𝜃))
Theorem	bj-cbvalimd0 36975	A lemma for alpha-renaming of variables bound by a universal quantifier. In applications, 𝑥 = 𝑦 will be substituted for 𝜓 and ax6ev 1976 will prove Hypothesis bj-cbvalimd0.denote. When ax6ev 1976 is not available but only its universal closure is, then bj-cbvalimd 36978 or bj-cbvalimdv 36980 should be used (see bj-cbvalimdlem 36976, bj-cbval 36993). (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑦𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜃 → 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜒 → ∀𝑦𝜃))
Theorem	bj-cbvalimdlem 36976	A lemma for alpha-renaming of variables bound by a universal quantifier. Hypothesis bj-cbvalimdlem.nfch can be proved either from DV conditions as in bj-cbvalimdv 36980 or from a nonfreeness condition and alcom 2170 as in bj-cbvalimd 36978. Hypothesis bj-cbvalimdlem.denote is weaker than the corresponding hypothesis of bj-cbvalimd0 36975, and this proof is therefore a bit longer, not using bj-spim 36973 but bj-eximcom 36964. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Mar-2023.) Proof should not use 19.35 1884. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜒 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜃 → 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦∃𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜒 → ∀𝑦𝜃))
Theorem	bj-cbveximdlem 36977	A lemma for alpha-renaming of variables bound by an existential quantifier. Hypothesis bj-cbveximdlem.nfth can be proved either from DV conditions as in bj-cbveximdv 36981 or from a nonfreeness condition and excom 2173 as in bj-cbveximd 36979. Hypothesis bj-cbveximdlem.denote is weaker than the corresponding hypothesis of ~ bj-cbveximd0 , and this proof is therefore a bit longer, not using bj-spime 36974 but bj-eximcom 36964. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Mar-2023.) Proof should not use 19.35 1884. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑦𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜃 → ∃𝑦𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∃𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜒 → ∃𝑦𝜃))
Theorem	bj-cbvalimd 36978	A lemma for alpha-renaming of variables bound by a universal quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑦𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜃 → 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦∃𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜒 → ∀𝑦𝜃))
Theorem	bj-cbveximd 36979	A lemma for alpha-renaming of variables bound by an existential quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑦𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜃 → 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∃𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜒 → ∃𝑦𝜃))
Theorem	bj-cbvalimdv 36980*	A lemma for alpha-renaming of variables bound by a universal quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜃 → 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦∃𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜒 → ∀𝑦𝜃))
Theorem	bj-cbveximdv 36981*	A lemma for alpha-renaming of variables bound by an existential quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑦𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∃𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜒 → ∃𝑦𝜃))
21.19.4.4  Adding ax-5
Theorem	bj-spvw 36982*	Version of spvw 1988 and 19.3v 1989 proved from ax-1 6-- ax-5 1917. The antecedent can for instance be proved with the existence axiom extru 1982. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Mar-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-spvew 36983*	Version of 19.8v 1990 and 19.9v 1991 proved from ax-1 6-- ax-5 1917. The antecedent can for instance be proved with the existence axiom extru 1982. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Mar-2026.) This could also be proved from bj-spvw 36982 using duality, but that proof would not be intuitionistic, contrary to the present one. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-alextruim 36984*	An equivalent expression for universal quantification over a non-occurring variable proved over ax-1 6-- ax-5 1917. The forward implication can be strengthened when ax-6 1974 is posited (which implies that models are non-empty), see spvw 1988. The reverse implication can be seen as a strengthening of ax-5 1917 (since the antecedent of the implication is weakened). See bj-exextruan 36985 for a dual statement. An approximate meaning is: the universal quantification of a proposition over a non-occurring variable holds if and only if the proposition holds in nonempty universes. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Mar-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥⊤ → 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-exextruan 36985*	An equivalent expression for existential quantification over a non-occurring variable proved over ax-1 6-- ax-5 1917. The forward implication can be seen as a strengthening of ax-5 1917 (a conjunct is added to the consequent of the implication). The reverse implication can be strengthened when ax-6 1974 is posited (which implies that models are non-empty), see 19.8v 1990. See bj-alextruim 36984 for a dual statement. An approximate meaning is: the existential quantification of a proposition over a non-occurring variable holds if and only if the proposition holds and the universe is nonempty. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Mar-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥⊤ ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-cbvalvv 36986*	Universally quantifying over a non-occurring variable is independent of that variable, over ax-1 6-- ax-5 1917 and the existence axiom extru 1982. See bj-cbvaw 36988 for a strengthening. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Mar-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-cbvexvv 36987*	Existentially quantifying over a non-occurring variable is independent of that variable, over ax-1 6-- ax-5 1917 and the existence axiom extru 1982. See bj-cbvew 36989 for a strengthening. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Mar-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∃𝑦𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-cbvaw 36988*	Universally quantifying over a non-occurring variable is independent from the variable, under a weaker condition than in bj-cbvalvv 36986. If ⊥ is substituted for 𝜑, then the statement reads: "universally quantifying over a non-occurring variable is independent from the variable as soon as that result is true for the False truth constant". The label "cbvaw" means "'change bound variable' theorem, 'all' quantifier, weak version". (Contributed by BJ, 14-Mar-2026.) This proof is not intuitionistic (it uses ja 187); an intuitionistically valid statement is obtained by expressing the antecedent as a disjunction (classically equivalent through imor 859). (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦⊥) → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-cbvew 36989*	Existentially quantifying over a non-occurring variable is independent from the variable, under a weaker condition than in bj-cbvexvv 36987. If ⊤ is substituted for 𝜑, then the statement reads: "existentially quantifying over a non-occurring variable is independent from the variable as soon as that result is true for the True truth constant. The label "cbvew" means "'change bound variable' theorem, 'exists' quantifier, weak version". (Contributed by BJ, 14-Mar-2026.) This proof is intuitionistic. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥⊤ → ∃𝑦𝜑) → (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-cbveaw 36990*	Universally quantifying over a non-occurring variable is independent from the variable, under a weaker condition than in bj-cbvalvv 36986. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Mar-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥⊤ → ∃𝑦𝜑) → (∀𝑦𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-cbvaew 36991*	Exixtentially quantifying over a non-occurring variable is independent from the variable, under a weaker condition than in bj-cbvexvv 36987. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Mar-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦⊥) → (∃𝑦𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ax12wlem 36992*	A lemma used to prove a weak version of the axiom of substitution ax-12 2189. (Temporary comment: The general statement that ax12wlem 2143 proves.) (Contributed by BJ, 20-Mar-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-cbval 36993*	Changing a bound variable (universal quantification case) in a weak axiomatization that assumes that all variables denote (which is valid in inclusive free logic) and that equality is symmetric. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Mar-2023.) Proved from ax-1 6-- ax-5 1917. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ∀𝑦∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥∃𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	bj-cbvex 36994*	Changing a bound variable (existential quantification case) in a weak axiomatization that assumes that all variables denote (which is valid in inclusive free logic) and that equality is symmetric. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Mar-2023.) Proved from ax-1 6-- ax-5 1917. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ∀𝑦∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥∃𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥    &   ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜒))
Syntax	wmoo 36995	Syntax for BJ's version of the uniqueness quantifier.
wff ∃**𝑥𝜑
Definition	df-bj-mo 36996*	Definition of the uniqueness quantifier which is correct on the empty domain. Instead of the fresh variable 𝑧, one could save a dummy variable by using 𝑥 or 𝑦 at the cost of having nested quantifiers on the same variable. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃**𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))
21.19.4.5  Equality and substitution
Theorem	bj-df-sb 36997*	Proposed definition to replace df-sb 2074 and df-sbc 3731. Proof is therefore unimportant. Contrary to df-sb 2074, this definition makes a substituted formula false when one substitutes a non-existent object for a variable: this is better suited to the "Levy-style" treatment of classes as virtual objects adopted by set.mm. That difference is unimportant since as soon as ax6ev 1976 is posited, all variables "exist". (Contributed by BJ, 19-Feb-2026.)
⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦(𝑦 = 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))
Theorem	bj-sbcex 36998	Proof of sbcex 3740 when taking bj-df-sb 36997 as definition. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Feb-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	bj-dfsbc 36999	Proof of df-sbc 3731 when taking bj-df-sb 36997 as definition. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Feb-2026.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	bj-ssbeq 37000*	Substitution in an equality, disjoint variables case. Uses only ax-1 6 through ax-6 1974. It might be shorter to prove the result about composition of two substitutions and prove bj-ssbeq 37000 first with a DV condition on 𝑥, 𝑡, and then in the general case. (Contributed by BJ, 22-Dec-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑡 / 𝑥]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑧)