| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 372 of 504) | < Previous Next > | |
| Bad symbols? Try the
GIF version. |
||
|
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > MPE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
||
| Color key: | (1-31014) |
(31015-32537) |
(32538-50302) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfnth 37101 | A variable is nonfree in the negation of a theorem, inference form. (Contributed by BJ, 27-Aug-2023.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfim 37102 | Nonfreeness in the antecedent and the consequent of an implication implies nonfreeness in the implication. (Contributed by BJ, 27-Aug-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 ∧ Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) → Ⅎ'𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfimd 37103 | Nonfreeness in the antecedent and the consequent of an implication implies nonfreeness in the implication, deduction form. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfan 37104 | Nonfreeness in both conjuncts implies nonfreeness in the conjunction. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2023.) In classical logic, there is a proof using the definition of conjunction in terms of implication and negation, so using bj-nnfim 37102, bj-nnfnt 37100 and bj-nnfbi 37097, but we want a proof valid in intuitionistic logic. (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 ∧ Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) → Ⅎ'𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfand 37105 | Nonfreeness in both conjuncts implies nonfreeness in the conjunction, deduction form. Note: compared with the proof of bj-nnfan 37104, it has two more essential steps but fewer total steps (since there are fewer intermediate formulas to build) and is easier to follow and understand. This statement is of intermediate complexity: for simpler statements, closed-style proofs like that of bj-nnfan 37104 will generally be shorter than deduction-style proofs while still easy to follow, while for more complex statements, the opposite will be true (and deduction-style proofs like that of bj-nnfand 37105 will generally be easier to understand). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥(𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfor 37106 | Nonfreeness in both disjuncts implies nonfreeness in the disjunction. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2023.) In classical logic, there is a proof using the definition of disjunction in terms of implication and negation, so using bj-nnfim 37102, bj-nnfnt 37100 and bj-nnfbi 37097, but we want a proof valid in intuitionistic logic. (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 ∧ Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) → Ⅎ'𝑥(𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnford 37107 | Nonfreeness in both disjuncts implies nonfreeness in the disjunction, deduction form. See comments for bj-nnfor 37106 and bj-nnfand 37105. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥(𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfbit 37108 | Nonfreeness in both sides implies nonfreeness in the biconditional. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 ∧ Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) → Ⅎ'𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfbid 37109 | Nonfreeness in both sides implies nonfreeness in the biconditional, deduction form. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥(𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnf-exlim 37110 | Proof of the closed form of exlimi 2229 from modalK (compare exlimiv 1937). See also bj-sylget2 36952. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-19.21t 37111 | Statement 19.21t 2218 proved from modalK (obsoleting 19.21v 1946). (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-19.23t 37112 | Statement 19.23t 2222 proved from modalK (obsoleting 19.23v 1949). (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-19.36im 37113 | One direction of 19.36 2242 from the same axioms as 19.36imv 1952. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓 → (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-19.37im 37114 | One direction of 19.37 2244 from the same axioms as 19.37imv 1954. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 → (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-19.42t 37115 | Closed form of 19.42 2248 from the same axioms as 19.42v 1960. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 → (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-19.41t 37116 | Closed form of 19.41 2247 from the same axioms as 19.41v 1956. The same is doable with 19.27 2239, 19.28 2240, 19.31 2246, 19.32 2245, 19.44 2249, 19.45 2250. (Contributed by BJ, 2-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓 → (∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-pm11.53vw 37117 | Version of pm11.53v 1951 with nonfreeness antecedents. One can also prove the theorem with antecedent (Ⅎ'𝑦∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓). (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥Ⅎ'𝑦𝜑 ∧ Ⅎ'𝑥∀𝑦𝜓) → (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfv 37118* | A non-occurring variable is nonfree in a formula. (Contributed by BJ, 28-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfbd 37119* | If two formulas are equivalent, then nonfreeness of a variable in one of them is equivalent to nonfreeness in the other, deduction form. See bj-nnfbi 37097. (Contributed by BJ, 27-Aug-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓 ↔ Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-pm11.53a 37120* | A variant of pm11.53v 1951. One can similarly prove a variant with DV (𝑦, 𝜑) and ∀𝑦Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓 instead of DV (𝑥, 𝜓) and ∀𝑥Ⅎ'𝑦𝜑. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ'𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-equsvt 37121* | A variant of equsv 2010. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-equsalvwd 37122* | Variant of equsalvw 2011. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-equsexvwd 37123* | Variant of equsexvw 2012. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnf-spim 37124* | A universal specialization result in deduction form, proved from ax-1 6 -- ax-6 1974, where the only DV condition is on 𝑥, 𝑦 and where 𝑥 should be nonfree in the new proposition 𝜒 (and in the context 𝜑). (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnf-spime 37125* | An existential generalization result in deduction form, from ax-1 6-- ax-6 1974, where the only DV condition is on 𝑥, 𝑦, and where 𝑥 should be nonfree in the new proposition 𝜒 (and in the context 𝜑). (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnf-cbvaliv 37126* | The only DV conditions are those saying that 𝑦 is a fresh variable used to construct 𝜒. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-sbievwd 37127* | Variant of sbievw 2104. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-sbft 37128 | Version of sbft 2281 using Ⅎ', proved from core axioms. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2023.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnf-cbvali 37129* | Compared with bj-nnf-cbvaliv 37126, replacing the DV condition on 𝑦, 𝜓 with the nonfreeness condition requires ax-11 2168. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑦𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnf-cbval 37130* | Compared with cbvalv1 2349, this saves ax-12 2189. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑦𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-dfnnf3 37131 | Alternate definition of nonfreeness when sp 2195 is available. (Contributed by BJ, 28-Jul-2023.) The proof should not rely on df-nf 1791. (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nfnnfTEMP 37132 | New nonfreeness is equivalent to old nonfreeness on core FOL axioms plus sp 2195. (Contributed by BJ, 28-Jul-2023.) The proof should not rely on df-nf 1791 except via df-nf 1791 directly. (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ'𝑥𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-wnfnf 37133 | When 𝜑 is substituted for 𝜓, this statement expresses nonfreeness in the weak form of nonfreeness (∃ → ∀). Note that this could also be proved from bj-nnfim 37102, bj-nnfe1 37135 and bj-nnfa1 37134. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ'𝑥(∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfa1 37134 | See nfa1 2162. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Aug-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ'𝑥∀𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfe1 37135 | See nfe1 2161. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Aug-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ'𝑥∃𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnflemaa 37136 | One of four lemmas for nonfreeness: antecedent and consequent both expressed using universal quantifier. Note: this is bj-hbalt 37030. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Aug-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnflemee 37137 | One of four lemmas for nonfreeness: antecedent and consequent both expressed using existential quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Aug-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(∃𝑦𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑦∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnflemae 37138 | One of four lemmas for nonfreeness: antecedent expressed with universal quantifier and consequent expressed with existential quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Aug-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦∃𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnflemea 37139 | One of four lemmas for nonfreeness: antecedent expressed with existential quantifier and consequent expressed with universal quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Aug-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(∃𝑦𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑦∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfalt 37140 | See nfal 2332 and bj-nfalt 37063. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Aug-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ'𝑦𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑦∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nnfext 37141 | See nfex 2333 and bj-nfext 37064. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Aug-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ'𝑦𝜑 → Ⅎ'𝑦∃𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-pm11.53v 37142 | Version of pm11.53v 1951 with nonfreeness antecedents. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥Ⅎ'𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦Ⅎ'𝑥𝜓) → (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-axc10 37143 | Alternate proof of axc10 2393. Shorter. One can prove a version with DV (𝑥, 𝑦) without ax-13 2380, by using ax6ev 1976 instead of ax6e 2391. (Contributed by BJ, 31-Mar-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-alequex 37144 | A fol lemma. See alequexv 2008 for a version with a disjoint variable condition requiring fewer axioms. Can be used to reduce the proof of spimt 2394 from 133 to 112 bytes. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → ∃𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-spimt2 37145 | A step in the proof of spimt 2394. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → ((∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbv3ta 37146 | Closed form of cbv3 2405. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → ((∀𝑦(∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbv3tb 37147 | Closed form of cbv3 2405. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → ((∀𝑦Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-hbsb3t 37148 | A theorem close to a closed form of hbsb3 2495. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-hbsb3 37149 | Shorter proof of hbsb3 2495. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nfs1t 37150 | A theorem close to a closed form of nfs1 2496. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) → Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nfs1t2 37151 | A theorem close to a closed form of nfs1 2496. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nfs1 37152 | Shorter proof of nfs1 2496 (three essential steps instead of four). (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 | ||
It is known that ax-13 2380 is logically redundant (see ax13w 2147 and the head comment of the section "Logical redundancy of ax-10--13"). More precisely, one can remove dependency on ax-13 2380 from every theorem in set.mm which is totally unbundled (i.e., has disjoint variable conditions on all setvar variables). Indeed, start with the existing proof, and replace any occurrence of ax-13 2380 with ax13w 2147. This section is an experiment to see in practice if (partially) unbundled versions of existing theorems can be proved more efficiently without ax-13 2380 (and using ax6v 1975 / ax6ev 1976 instead of ax-6 1974 / ax6e 2391, as is currently done). One reason to be optimistic is that the first few utility theorems using ax-13 2380 (roughly 200 of them) are then used mainly with dummy variables, which one can assume distinct from any other, so that the unbundled versions of the utility theorems suffice. In this section, we prove versions of theorems in the main part with dv conditions and not requiring ax-13 2380, labeled bj-xxxv (we follow the proof of xxx but use ax6v 1975 and ax6ev 1976 instead of ax-6 1974 and ax6e 2391, and ax-5 1917 instead of ax13v 2381; shorter proofs may be possible). When no additional dv condition is required, we label it bj-xxx. It is important to keep all the bundled theorems already in set.mm, but one may also add the (partially) unbundled versions which dispense with ax-13 2380, so as to remove dependencies on ax-13 2380 from many existing theorems. UPDATE: it turns out that several theorems of the form bj-xxxv, or minor variations, are already in set.mm with label xxxw. It is also possible to remove dependencies on ax-11 2168, typically by replacing a nonfree hypothesis with a disjoint variable condition (see cbv3v2 2253 and following theorems). | ||
| Theorem | bj-axc10v 37153* | Version of axc10 2393 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-spimtv 37154* | Version of spimt 2394 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbv3hv2 37155* | Version of cbv3h 2412 with two disjoint variable conditions, which does not require ax-11 2168 nor ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbv1hv 37156* | Version of cbv1h 2413 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbv2hv 37157* | Version of cbv2h 2414 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbv2v 37158* | Version of cbv2 2411 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbvaldv 37159* | Version of cbvald 2415 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbvexdv 37160* | Version of cbvexd 2416 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbval2vv 37161* | Version of cbval2vv 2421 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧∀𝑤𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbvex2vv 37162* | Version of cbvex2vv 2422 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbvaldvav 37163* | Version of cbvaldva 2417 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbvexdvav 37164* | Version of cbvexdva 2418 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-cbvex4vv 37165* | Version of cbvex4v 2423 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑣 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑢) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ ((𝑧 = 𝑓 ∧ 𝑤 = 𝑔) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑣∃𝑢∃𝑓∃𝑔𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | bj-equsalhv 37166* |
Version of equsalh 2428 with a disjoint variable condition, which
does not
require ax-13 2380. Remark: this is the same as equsalhw 2302. TODO:
delete after moving the following paragraph somewhere.
Remarks: equsexvw 2012 has been moved to Main; Theorem ax13lem2 2384 has a DV version which is a simple consequence of ax5e 1919; Theorems nfeqf2 2385, dveeq2 2386, nfeqf1 2387, dveeq1 2388, nfeqf 2389, axc9 2390, ax13 2383, have dv versions which are simple consequences of ax-5 1917. (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 37167* | Version of axc11n 2434 with a disjoint variable condition; instance of aevlem 2064. 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 37168* | Version of aecoms 2436 with a disjoint variable condition, provable from Tarski's FOL. The corresponding version of naecoms 2437 should not be very useful since ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦, DV (𝑥, 𝑦) is true when the universe has at least two objects (see dtru 5383). (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-axc11v 37169* | Version of axc11 2438 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380 nor ax-10 2152. Remark: the following theorems (hbae 2439, nfae 2441, hbnae 2440, nfnae 2442, hbnaes 2443) would need to be totally unbundled to be proved without ax-13 2380, hence would be simple consequences of ax-5 1917 or nfv 1921. (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-drnf2v 37170* | Version of drnf2 2452 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-10 2152, ax-11 2168, ax-12 2189, ax-13 2380. Instance of nfbidv 1929. Note that the version of axc15 2430 with a disjoint variable condition is actually ax12v2 2191 (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 37171* | Version of equs45f 2467 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. Note that the version of equs5 2468 with a disjoint variable condition is actually sbalex 2254 (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 37172* | Version of hbsb2 2490 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380, and removal of ax-13 2380 from hbs1 2285. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nfs1v 37173* | Version of nfsb2 2491 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380, and removal of ax-13 2380 from nfs1v 2167. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | bj-hbsb2av 37174* | Version of hbsb2a 2492 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Contributed by BJ, 11-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-hbsb3v 37175* | Version of hbsb3 2495 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380. (Remark: the unbundled version of nfs1 2496 is given by bj-nfs1v 37173.) (Contributed by BJ, 11-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-nfsab1 37176* | Remove dependency on ax-13 2380 from nfsab1 2726. UPDATE / TODO: nfsab1 2726 does not use ax-13 2380 either anymore; bj-nfsab1 37176 is shorter than nfsab1 2726 but uses ax-12 2189. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | bj-dtrucor2v 37177* | Version of dtrucor2 5308 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2380 (nor ax-4 1816, ax-5 1917, ax-7 2015, ax-12 2189). (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
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 37178 | Biconditional version of a form of hbae 2439 with commuted quantifiers, not requiring ax-11 2168. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑧 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | bj-hbaeb 37179 | Biconditional version of hbae 2439. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | bj-hbnaeb 37180 | Biconditional version of hbnae 2440 (to replace it?). (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | bj-dvv 37181 | A special instance of bj-hbaeb2 37178. 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) | ||
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 36908), then they should be added to the database. The present case is similar. Similar additions can be done regarding equsex 2426 (and equsalh 2428 and equsexh 2429). Even if only one of these two theorems holds, it should be added to the database. | ||
| Theorem | bj-equsal1t 37182 | Duplication of wl-equsal1t 37920, with shorter proof. If one imposes a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑦, then one can use alequexv 2008 and reduce axiom dependencies, and similarly for the following theorems. Note: wl-equsalcom 37921 is also interesting. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-equsal1ti 37183 | Inference associated with bj-equsal1t 37182. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-equsal1 37184 | One direction of equsal 2425. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | bj-equsal2 37185 | One direction of equsal 2425. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-equsal 37186 | Shorter proof of equsal 2425. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.) Proof modification is discouraged to avoid using equsal 2425, but "min */exc equsal" is ok. (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
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 37187 | Closed form of stdpc5 2220. (Possible to place it before 19.21t 2218 and use it to prove 19.21t 2218). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-stdpc5 37188 | More direct proof of stdpc5 2220. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 2stdpc5 37189 | A double stdpc5 2220 (one direction of PM*11.3). See also 2stdpc4 2081 and 19.21vv 44827. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bj-19.21t0 37190 | Proof of 19.21t 2218 from stdpc5t 37187. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | exlimii 37191 | Inference associated with exlimi 2229. 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 37192 | Proof of ax-11 2168 similar to PM's proof of alcom 2170 (PM*11.2). For a proof closer to PM's proof, see ax11-pm2 37196. Axiom ax-11 2168 is used in the proof only through nfa2 2186. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | ax6er 37193 | Commuted form of ax6e 2391. (Could be placed right after ax6e 2391). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | exlimiieq1 37194 | 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 37195 | 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 37196* | Proof of ax-11 2168 from the standard axioms of predicate calculus, similar to PM's proof of alcom 2170 (PM*11.2). This proof requires that 𝑥 and 𝑦 be distinct. Axiom ax-11 2168 is used in the proof only through nfal 2332, nfsb 2531, sbal 2180, sb8 2525. See also ax11-pm 37192. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-sbsb 37197 | Biconditional showing two possible (dual) definitions of substitution df-sb 2074 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 37198 | Alternate (dual) definition of substitution df-sb 2074 not using dummy variables. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2021.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∨ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | bj-sbf3 37199 | Substitution has no effect on a bound variable (existential quantifier case); see sbf2 2283. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bj-sbf4 37200 | Substitution has no effect on a bound variable (nonfreeness case); see sbf2 2283. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |