P. 375 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 37401-37500   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	bj-con2comi 37401	Inference associated with bj-con2com 37400. Its associated inference is mt2 203. TODO: when in the main part, add to mt2 203 that it is the inference associated with bj-con2comi 37401. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2020.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜓 → ¬ 𝜑) → ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-nimn 37402	If a formula is true, then it does not imply its negation. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2020.) A shorter proof is possible using id 23 and jc 162, however, the present proof uses theorems that are more basic than jc 162. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-nimni 37403	Inference associated with bj-nimn 37402. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2020.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-peircei 37404	Inference associated with peirce 205. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Mar-2020.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	bj-looinvi 37405	Inference associated with looinv 206. Its associated inference is bj-looinvii 37406. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Mar-2020.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜑) → 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-looinvii 37406	Inference associated with bj-looinvi 37405. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Mar-2020.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	bj-mt2bi 37407	Version of mt2 203 where the major premise is a biconditional. Shortens fal 1584 (see bj-fal 37408) . Another proof is also possible via con2bii 360 and mpbi 233. The current mt2bi 366 should be relabeled, maybe to imfal. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2024.)
⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ¬ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ 𝜓
Theorem	bj-fal 37408	Shortening of fal 1584 using bj-mt2bi 37407. (Contributed by Anthony Hart, 22-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Mel L. O'Cat, 11-Mar-2012.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ ⊥
Theorem	bj-ntrufal 37409	The negation of a theorem is equivalent to false. Shortens dfnul2 4282 (see bj-dfnul2 37410). (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2024.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ ⊥)
Theorem	bj-dfnul2 37410	Alternate definition of the empty set. Definition 5.14 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 20. (Contributed by NM, 26-Dec-1996.) Remove dependency on ax-10 2178, ax-11 2194, and ax-12 2213. (Revised by Steven Nguyen, 3-May-2023.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 23-Sep-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ∅ = {𝑥 ∣ ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑥}
21.19.1.6  Disjunction A few lemmas about disjunction. The fundamental theorems in this family are the dual statements pm4.71 567 and pm4.72 964. See also biort 949 and biorf 950.
Theorem	bj-jaoi1 37411	Shortens orfa2 38988 (58>53), pm1.2 917 (20>18), pm1.2 917 (20>18), pm2.4 920 (31>25), pm2.41 921 (31>25), pm2.42 957 (38>32), pm3.2ni 894 (43>39), pm4.44 1012 (55>51). (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-jaoi2 37412	Shortens consensus 1068 (110>106), elnn0z 12687 (336>329), pm1.2 917 (20>19), pm3.2ni 894 (43>39), pm4.44 1012 (55>51). (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜑) → 𝜓)
21.19.1.7  Logical equivalence A few other characterizations of the biconditional. The inter-definability of logical connectives offers many ways to express a given statement. Some useful theorems in this regard are df-or 862, df-an 402, pm4.64 863, imor 867, pm4.62 870 through pm4.67 404, and, for the De Morgan laws, ianor 997 through pm4.57 1006.
Theorem	bj-dfbi4 37413	Alternate definition of the biconditional. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Oct-2019.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ ¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-dfbi5 37414	Alternate definition of the biconditional. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Oct-2019.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-dfbi6 37415	Alternate definition of the biconditional. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Oct-2019.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-bijust0ALT 37416	Alternate proof of bijust0 207; shorter but using additional intermediate results. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1999.) (Proof shortened by Josh Purinton, 29-Dec-2000.) (Revised by BJ, 19-Mar-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜑) → ¬ (𝜑 → 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-bijust00 37417	A self-implication does not imply the negation of a self-implication. Most general theorem of which bijust 208 is an instance (bijust0 207 and bj-bijust0ALT 37416 are therefore also instances of it). (Contributed by BJ, 7-Sep-2022.)
⊢ ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜑) → ¬ (𝜓 → 𝜓))
21.19.1.8  The conditional operator for propositions
Theorem	bj-consensus 37418	Version of consensus 1068 expressed using the conditional operator. (Remark: it may be better to express it as consensus 1068, using only binary connectives, and hinting at the fact that it is a Boolean algebra identity, like the absorption identities.) (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.)
⊢ ((if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒))
Theorem	bj-consensusALT 37419	Alternate proof of bj-consensus 37418. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ if-(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒))
Theorem	bj-df-ifc 37420*	Candidate definition for the conditional operator for classes. This is in line with the definition of a class as the extension of a predicate in df-clab 2740. We reprove the current df-if 4483 from it in bj-dfif 37421. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ if(𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) = {𝑥 ∣ if-(𝜑, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵)}
Theorem	bj-dfif 37421*	Alternate definition of the conditional operator for classes, which used to be the main definition. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Dec-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ if(𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) = {𝑥 ∣ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵))}
Theorem	bj-ififc 37422	A biconditional connecting the conditional operator for propositions and the conditional operator for classes. Note that there is no sethood hypothesis on 𝑋: it is implied by either side. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Sep-2019.) Generalize statement from setvar 𝑥 to class 𝑋. (Revised by BJ, 26-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (𝑋 ∈ if(𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) ↔ if-(𝜑, 𝑋 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑋 ∈ 𝐵))
21.19.1.9  Propositional calculus: miscellaneous Miscellaneous theorems of propositional calculus.
Theorem	bj-imbi12 37423	Uncurried (imported) form of imbi12 349. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) → ((𝜑 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜃)))
Theorem	bj-falor 37424	Dual of truan 1581 (which has biconditional reversed). (Contributed by BJ, 26-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (⊥ ∨ 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-falor2 37425	Dual of truan 1581. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((⊥ ∨ 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-bibibi 37426	A property of the biconditional. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-imn3ani 37427	Duplication of bnj1224 35414. Three-fold version of imnani 406. (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 37428	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 37429	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 37430	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 37431	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 1828 corresponds to the necessitation rule of modal logic, and ax-4 1842 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/ 1842. A basic result in this logic is bj-gl4 37435.
Theorem	bj-axdd2 37432	This implication, proved using only ax-gen 1828 and ax-4 1842 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 37433. (Contributed by BJ, 16-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-axd2d 37433	This implication, proved using only ax-gen 1828 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 37432. (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 37434	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 37432 and bj-axd2d 37433. (Contributed by BJ, 16-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜑 → ¬ 𝜑) → ((∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜑)))
Theorem	bj-gl4 37435	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 37435 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 37436	Over minimal calculus, the modal axiom (4) (hba1 2327) and the modal axiom (K) (ax-4 1842) together imply axc4 2352. (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 37438 and ax-prv2 37439 and ax-prv3 37440. Note the similarity with ax-gen 1828, ax-4 1842 and hba1 2327 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/ 2327. 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 37443) and Löb's theorem (bj-babylob 37444). See the comments of these theorems for details.
Syntax	cprvb 37437	Syntax for the provability predicate.
wff Prv 𝜑
Axiom	ax-prv1 37438	First property of three of the provability predicate. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ Prv 𝜑
Axiom	ax-prv2 37439	Second property of three of the provability predicate. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (Prv (𝜑 → 𝜓) → (Prv 𝜑 → Prv 𝜓))
Axiom	ax-prv3 37440	Third property of three of the provability predicate. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (Prv 𝜑 → Prv Prv 𝜑)
Theorem	prvlem1 37441	An elementary property of the provability predicate. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (Prv 𝜑 → Prv 𝜓)
Theorem	prvlem2 37442	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 37443	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 37444	See the section header comments for the context, as well as the comments for bj-babygodel 37443. 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/ 37443). (Contributed by BJ, 20-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (𝜓 ↔ (Prv 𝜓 → 𝜑))    &   ⊢ (Prv 𝜑 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	bj-godellob 37445	Proof of Gödel's theorem from Löb's theorem (see comments at bj-babygodel 37443 and bj-babylob 37444 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 37446	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 37447	Generalization rule on the right conjunct. See 19.28 2265. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	bj-genl 37448	Generalization rule on the left conjunct. See 19.27 2264. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-genan 37449	Generalization rule on a conjunction. Forward inference associated with 19.26 1903. (Contributed by BJ, 7-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	bj-mpgs 37450	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 2220 (modal T) is available. Therefore, this theorem is stronger than mpg 1830, and strictly stronger when sp 2220 is not available. (Contributed by BJ, 1-Nov-2023.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜑) → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜓
21.19.4.3  Adding ax-4
Theorem	bj-almp 37451	A quantified form of ax-mp 5. See also barbara 2688, bj-ala1i 37458, bj-almpi 37459. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2026.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜑)    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜑
Theorem	bj-sylggt 37452	Stronger form of sylgt 1855, closer to ax-2 7. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Jul-2025.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒)) → ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-alrimg 37453	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 37475. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓) → (∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-sylgt2 37454	Uncurried (imported) form of sylgt 1855. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒) ∧ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	bj-nexdh 37455	Closed form of nexdh 1898 (actually, its general instance). (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) → ((𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → (𝜒 → ¬ ∃𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-nexdh2 37456	Uncurried (imported) form of bj-nexdh 37455. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥(𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜑)) → (𝜒 → ¬ ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-alimii 37457	Inference associated with alimi 1844. Double inference associated with alim 1843. The usual proof of an associated inference (here from alimi 1844 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 37458	Add an antecedent in a universally quantified formula. Inference associated with ala1 1846. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ ∀𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-almpi 37459	A quantified form of mpi 21. See also barbara 2688, bj-ala1i 37458, bj-almp 37451. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2026.)
⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓))    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-almpig 37460	A partially quantified form of mpi 21 similar to bj-almpi 37459. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2026.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓))    &   ⊢ ∀𝑥𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-alsyl 37461	Syllogism under the universal quantifier, in the curried form appearing as Theorem *10.3 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 145. See alsyl 1926 for the uncurried form. (Contributed by BJ, 28-Mar-2026.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜒) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-2alim 37462	Closed form of 2alimi 1845. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-alimdh 37463	General instance of alimdh 1850. (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 37464	Deduction form of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p. 90, see 19.21 2244 and 19.21h 2321. (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 37465	A slightly more general alrimd 2252. A common usage will have 𝜑 substituted for 𝜓 and 𝜒 substituted for 𝜃, giving a form closer to alrimd 2252. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜏))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜏))
Theorem	bj-exa1i 37466	Add an antecedent in an existentially quantified formula. Inference associated with exa1 1871. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝜓 → 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-alanim 37467	Closed form of alanimi 1849. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) → ((∀𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜓) → ∀𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	bj-2albi 37468	Closed form of 2albii 1853. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-notalbii 37469	Equivalence of universal quantification of negation of equivalent formulas. Shortens ab0 4329 (103>94), ballotlem2 35104 (2655>2648), bnj1143 35403 (522>519), hausdiag 23944 (2119>2104). (Contributed by BJ, 17-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-2exim 37470	Closed form of 2eximi 1869. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-2exbi 37471	Closed form of 2exbii 1882. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-3exbi 37472	Closed form of 3exbii 1883. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	bj-sylget 37473	Dual statement of sylgt 1855. Closed form of bj-sylge 37476. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑) → ((∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜒 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-sylget2 37474	Uncurried (imported) form of bj-sylget 37473. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ ((∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜒))
Theorem	bj-exlimg 37475	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 37453. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑) → (∃𝑥𝜒 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-sylge 37476	Dual statement of sylg 1856 (the final "e" in the label stands for "existential (version of sylg 1856)". Variant of exlimih 2323. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜒 → 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-exlimd 37477	A slightly more general exlimd 2255. A common usage will have 𝜑 substituted for 𝜓 and 𝜃 substituted for 𝜏, giving a form closer to exlimd 2255. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜃 → 𝜏))    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜒 → 𝜏))
Theorem	bj-nfimexal 37478	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 1872) and the converse implication is the join of instances of bj-alrimg 37453 and bj-exlimg 37475 (see 19.38a 1873 and 19.38b 1874). 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 37479	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 1843 to allow use in bj-alexim 37480. (Revised by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-alexim 37480	Closed form of aleximi 1865. Note: this proof is shorter, so aleximi 1865 could be deduced from it (exim 1867 would have to be proved first, see bj-exim 37479). (Contributed by BJ, 8-Nov-2021.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-aleximiALT 37481	Alternate proof of aleximi 1865 from exim 1867, 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 37482	Closed form of hbxfrbi 1858. Note: it is less important than nfbiit 1884. The antecedent is in the "strong necessity" modality of modal logic (see also bj-nnftht 37615) in order not to require sp 2220 (modal T). See bj-hbyfrbi 37483 for its version with existential quantifiers. (Contributed by BJ, 6-May-2019.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) → ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ↔ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-hbyfrbi 37483	Version of bj-hbxfrbi 37482 with existential quantifiers. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Aug-2023.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) → ((∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-exalim 37484	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 1943. I propose to move to the main part: bj-exalim 37484, bj-exalimi 37485, bj-eximcom 37486 bj-exalims 37487, bj-exalimsi 37488, bj-ax12i 37491, bj-ax12wlem 37514, bj-ax12w 37547. A new label is needed for bj-ax12i 37491 and label suggestions are welcome for the others. I also propose to change ¬ ∀𝑥¬ to ∃𝑥 in speimfw 1996 and spimfw 1998 (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 37485	An inference for distributing quantifiers over a nested implication. The canonical derivation from its closed form bj-exalim 37484 (using mpg 1830) has fewer essential steps, but more steps in total (yielding a longer compressed proof). (Almost) the general statement that speimfw 1996 proves. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∃𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	bj-eximcom 37486	A commuted form of exim 1867 which is sometimes posited as an axiom in instuitionistic modal logic. Forward implication of 19.35 1910. Its converse is not intuitionistic. (Contributed by BJ, 9-Dec-2023.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-exalims 37487	Distributing quantifiers over a nested implication. (Almost) the general statement that spimfw 1998 proves. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (¬ 𝜒 → ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-exalimsi 37488	An inference for distributing quantifiers over a nested implication. (Almost) the general statement that spimfw 1998 proves. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (¬ 𝜒 → ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒))
Theorem	bj-axdd2ALT 37489	Alternate proof of bj-axdd2 37432 (this should replace bj-axdd2 37432 when bj-exalimi 37485 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 37490	A lemma used to prove a weak form of the axiom of substitution. A generalization of bj-ax12i 37491. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Dec-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-ax12i 37491	A weakening of bj-ax12ig 37490 that is sufficient to prove a weak form of the axiom of substitution ax-12 2213. The general statement of which ax12i 1999 is an instance. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Sep-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-nfimt 37492	Closed form of nfim 1929 and curried (exported) form of nfimt 1928. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) Proof should not use 19.35 1910. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-spimnfe 37493	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 2268, bj-19.36im 37635, 19.36imv 1978, spimfw 1998... (Contributed by BJ, 3-Apr-2026.) Proof should not use 19.35 1910. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((∃𝑥𝜓 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-spimenfa 37494	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 1910. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-spim 37495	A lemma for universal specification. In applications, 𝑥 = 𝑦 will be substituted for 𝜓 and ax6ev 2002 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 37496	A lemma for existential generalization. In applications, 𝑥 = 𝑦 will be substituted for 𝜓 and ax6ev 2002 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 37497	A lemma for alpha-renaming of variables bound by a universal quantifier. In applications, 𝑥 = 𝑦 will be substituted for 𝜓 and ax6ev 2002 will prove Hypothesis bj-cbvalimd0.denote. When ax6ev 2002 is not available but only its universal closure is, then bj-cbvalimd 37500 or bj-cbvalimdv 37502 should be used (see bj-cbvalimdlem 37498, bj-cbval 37515). (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 37498	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 37502 or from a nonfreeness condition and alcom 2196 as in bj-cbvalimd 37500. Hypothesis bj-cbvalimdlem.denote is weaker than the corresponding hypothesis of bj-cbvalimd0 37497, and this proof is therefore a bit longer, not using bj-spim 37495 but bj-eximcom 37486. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Mar-2023.) Proof should not use 19.35 1910. (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 37499	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 37503 or from a nonfreeness condition and excom 2199 as in bj-cbveximd 37501. 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 37496 but bj-eximcom 37486. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Mar-2023.) Proof should not use 19.35 1910. (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 37500	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))