| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 376 of 498) | < 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: | (1-30854) |
(30855-32377) |
(32378-49798) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax12v2cl 37501* |
The class version of ax12v2 2180, where the set variable 𝑦 is
replaced
with the class variable 𝐴. This is possible if 𝐴 is
known to
be a set, expressed by the antecedent.
Theorem ax12v 2179 is a specialization of ax12v2 2180. So any proof using ax12v 2179 will still hold if ax12v2 2180 is used instead. Theorem ax12v2 2180 expresses that two equal set variables cannot be distinguished by whatever complicated formula 𝜑 if one is replaced with the other in it. This theorem states a similar result for a class variable known to be a set: All sets equal to the class variable behave the same if they replace the class variable in 𝜑. Most axioms in FOL containing an equation correspond to a theorem where a class variable known to be a set replaces a set variable in the formula. Some exceptions cannot be avoided: The set variable must nowhere be bound. And it is not possible to state a distinct variable condition where a class 𝐴 is different from another, or distinct from a variable with type wff. So ax-12 2178 proper is out of reach: you cannot replace 𝑦 in ∀𝑦𝜑 with a class variable. But where such limitations are not violated, the proof of the FOL theorem should carry over to a version where a class variable, known to be set, appears instead of a set variable. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 8-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦 𝑦 = 𝐴 → (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-mps 37502 | Replacing a nested consequent. A sort of modus ponens in antecedent position. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | wl-syls1 37503 | Replacing a nested consequent. A sort of syllogism in antecedent position. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) & ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | wl-syls2 37504 | Replacing a nested antecedent. A sort of syllogism in antecedent position. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜒) → 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | wl-embant 37505 | A true wff can always be added as a nested antecedent to an antecedent. Note: this theorem is intuitionistically valid. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Oct-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | wl-orel12 37506 | In a conjunctive normal form a pair of nodes like (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) eliminates the need of a node (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒). This theorem allows simplifications in that respect. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Jun-2020.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜒)) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-cases2-dnf 37507 | A particular instance of orddi 1011 and anddi 1012 converting between disjunctive and conjunctive normal forms, when both 𝜑 and ¬ 𝜑 appear. This theorem in fact rephrases cases2 1047, and is related to consensus 1052. I restate it here in DNF and CNF. The proof deliberately does not use df-ifp 1063 and dfifp4 1066, by which it can be shortened. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jun-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-cbvmotv 37508* | Change bound variable. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. Part of Lemma 7 of [KalishMontague] p. 86. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑥⊤ → ∃*𝑦⊤) | ||
| Theorem | wl-moteq 37509 | Change bound variable. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. Part of Lemma 7 of [KalishMontague] p. 86. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑥⊤ → 𝑦 = 𝑧) | ||
| Theorem | wl-motae 37510 | Change bound variable. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. Part of Lemma 7 of [KalishMontague] p. 86. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑢⊤ → ∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧) | ||
| Theorem | wl-moae 37511* | Two ways to express "at most one thing exists" or, in this context equivalently, "exactly one thing exists" . The equivalence results from the presence of ax-6 1967 in the proof, that ensures "at least one thing exists". For other equivalences see wl-euae 37512 and exists1 2655. Gerard Lang pointed out, that ∃𝑦∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 with disjoint 𝑥 and 𝑦 (df-mo 2534, trut 1546) also means "exactly one thing exists" . (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) State the theorem using truth constant ⊤. (Revised by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.) Reduce axiom dependencies, and use ∃*. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 7-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∃*𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-euae 37512* | Two ways to express "exactly one thing exists" . (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∃!𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-nax6im 37513* | The following series of theorems are centered around the empty domain, where no set exists. As a consequence, a set variable like 𝑥 has no instance to assign to. An expression like 𝑥 = 𝑦 is not really meaningful then. What does it evaluate to, true or false? In fact, the grammar extension weq 1962 requires us to formally assign a boolean value to an equation, say always false, unless you want to give up on exmid 894, for example. Whatever it is, we start out with the contraposition of ax-6 1967, that guarantees the existence of at least one set. Our hypothesis here expresses tentatively it might not hold. We can simplify the antecedent then, to the point where we do not need equation any more. This suggests what a decent characterization of the empty domain of discourse could be. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 12-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-hbae1 37514 | This specialization of hbae 2430 does not depend on ax-11 2158. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 8-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-naevhba1v 37515* | An instance of hbn1w 2047 applied to equality. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 7-Apr-2021.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-spae 37516 |
Prove an instance of sp 2184 from ax-13 2371 and Tarski's FOL only, without
distinct variable conditions. The antecedent ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 holds in a
multi-object universe only if 𝑦 is substituted for 𝑥, or
vice
versa, i.e. both variables are effectively the same. The converse
¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 indicates that both variables are
distinct, and it so
provides a simple translation of a distinct variable condition to a
logical term. In case studies ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 and ¬
∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 can
help eliminating distinct variable conditions.
The antecedent ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 is expressed in the theorem's name by the abbreviation ae standing for 'all equal'. Note that we cannot provide a logical predicate telling us directly whether a logical expression contains a particular variable, as such a construct would usually contradict ax-12 2178. Note that this theorem is also provable from ax-12 2178 alone, so you can pick the axiom it is based on. Compare this result to 19.3v 1982 and spaev 2053 having distinct variable conditions, but a smaller footprint on axiom usage. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Apr-2021.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-speqv 37517* | Under the assumption ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 a specialized version of sp 2184 is provable from Tarski's FOL and ax13v 2372 only. Note that this reverts the implication in ax13lem1 2373, so in fact (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦)) holds. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2021.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-19.8eqv 37518* | Under the assumption ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 a specialized version of 19.8a 2182 is provable from Tarski's FOL and ax13v 2372 only. Note that this reverts the implication in ax13lem2 2375, so in fact (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦)) holds. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2021.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-19.2reqv 37519* | Under the assumption ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 the reverse direction of 19.2 1976 is provable from Tarski's FOL and ax13v 2372 only. Note that in conjunction with 19.2 1976 in fact (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦)) holds. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2021.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfalv 37520* | If 𝑥 is not present in 𝜑, it is not free in ∀𝑦𝜑. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Jan-2020.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfimf1 37521 | An antecedent is irrelevant to a not-free property, if it always holds. I used this variant of nfim 1896 in dvelimdf 2448 to simplify the proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 14-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfae1 37522 | Unlike nfae 2432, this specialized theorem avoids ax-11 2158. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfnae1 37523 | Unlike nfnae 2433, this specialized theorem avoids ax-11 2158. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | wl-aetr 37524 | A transitive law for variable identifying expressions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-axc11r 37525 | Same as axc11r 2367, but using ax12 2422 instead of ax-12 2178 directly. This better reflects axiom usage in theorems dependent on it. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jul-2015.) Avoid direct use of ax-12 2178. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 30-Mar-2024.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-dral1d 37526 | A version of dral1 2438 with a context. Note: At first glance one might be tempted to generalize this (or a similar) theorem by weakening the first two hypotheses adding a 𝑥 = 𝑦, ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 or 𝜑 antecedent. wl-equsal1i 37539 and nf5di 2285 show that this is in fact pointless. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-cbvalnaed 37527 | wl-cbvalnae 37528 with a context. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-cbvalnae 37528 | A more general version of cbval 2397 when nonfree properties depend on a distinctor. Such expressions arise in proofs aiming at the elimination of distinct variable constraints, specifically in application of dvelimf 2447, nfsb2 2482 or dveeq1 2379. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) & ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | wl-exeq 37529 | The semantics of ∃𝑥𝑦 = 𝑧. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (𝑦 = 𝑧 ∨ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-aleq 37530 | The semantics of ∀𝑥𝑦 = 𝑧. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (𝑦 = 𝑧 ∧ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfeqfb 37531 | Extend nfeqf 2380 to an equivalence. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfs1t 37532 | If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. Closed form of nfs1 2487. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsalvw 37533* |
Version of equsalv 2268 with a disjoint variable condition, and of equsal 2416
with two disjoint variable conditions, which requires fewer axioms. See
also the dual form equsexvw 2005.
This theorem lays the foundation to a transformation of expressions called substitution of set variables in a wff. Only in this particular context we additionally assume 𝜑 and 𝑦 disjoint, stated here as 𝜑(𝑥). Similarly the disjointness of 𝜓 and 𝑥 is expressed by 𝜓(𝑦). Both 𝜑 and 𝜓 may still depend on other set variables, but that is irrelevant here. We want to transform 𝜑(𝑥) into 𝜓(𝑦) such that 𝜓 depends on 𝑦 the same way as 𝜑 depends on 𝑥. This dependency is expressed in our hypothesis (called implicit substitution): (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)). For primitive enough 𝜑 a sort of textual substitution of 𝑥 by 𝑦 is sufficient for such transformation. But note: 𝜑 must not contain wff variables, and the substitution is no proper textual substitution either. We still need grammar information to not accidently replace the x in a token 'x.' denoting multiplication, but only catch set variables 𝑥. Our current stage of development allows only equations and quantifiers make up such primitives. Thanks to equequ1 2025 and cbvalvw 2036 we can then prove in a mechanical way that in fact the implicit substitution holds for each instance. If 𝜑 contains wff variables we cannot use textual transformation any longer, since we don't know how to replace 𝑦 for 𝑥 in placeholders of unknown structure. Our theorem now states, that the generic expression ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) formally behaves as if such a substitution was possible and made. (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsald 37534 | Deduction version of equsal 2416. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsaldv 37535* | Deduction version of equsal 2416. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsal 37536 | A useful equivalence related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) It seems proving wl-equsald 37534 first, and then deriving more specialized versions wl-equsal 37536 and wl-equsal1t 37537 then is more efficient than the other way round, which is possible, too. See also equsal 2416. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsal1t 37537 |
The expression 𝑥 = 𝑦 in antecedent position plays an
important role in
predicate logic, namely in implicit substitution. However, occasionally
it is irrelevant, and can safely be dropped. A sufficient condition for
this is when 𝑥 (or 𝑦 or both) is not free in
𝜑.
This theorem is more fundamental than equsal 2416, spimt 2385 or sbft 2270, to which it is related. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 19-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsalcom 37538 | This simple equivalence eases substitution of one expression for the other. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 1-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsal1i 37539 | The antecedent 𝑥 = 𝑦 is irrelevant, if one or both setvar variables are not free in 𝜑. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 1-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ∨ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbid2ft 37540* | A more general version of sbid2vw 2260. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 14-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-cbvalsbi 37541* | Change bounded variables in a special case. The reverse direction seems to involve ax-11 2158. My hope is that I will in some future be able to prove mo3 2558 with reversed quantifiers not using ax-11 2158. See also the remark in mo4 2560, which lead me to this effort. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2024.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbrimt 37542 | Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2304. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sblimt 37543 | Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2304. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb9v 37544* | Commutation of quantification and substitution variables based on fewer axioms than sb9 2518. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥[𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8ft 37545* | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8f 2352. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8eft 37546* | Substitution of variable in existentialal quantifier. Closed form of sb8ef 2354. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8t 37547 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8 2516. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8et 37548 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8e 2517. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbhbt 37549 | Closed form of sbhb 2520. Characterizing the expression 𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑 using a substitution expression. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbnf1 37550 | Two ways expressing that 𝑥 is effectively not free in 𝜑. Simplified version of sbnf2 2357. Note: This theorem shows that sbnf2 2357 has unnecessary distinct variable constraints. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsb3 37551 | equsb3 2104 with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsb4 37552 | Substitution applied to an atomic wff. The distinctor antecedent is more general than a distinct variable condition. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-2sb6d 37553 | Version of 2sb6 2087 with a context, and distinct variable conditions replaced with distinctors. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑤) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑧 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑦]𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbcom2d-lem1 37554* | Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 37556. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 10-Aug-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑣 = 𝑤) → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑤 → ([𝑢 / 𝑥][𝑣 / 𝑧]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑧]𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbcom2d-lem2 37555* | Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 37556. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 10-Aug-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → ([𝑢 / 𝑥][𝑣 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑥 = 𝑢 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑣) → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbcom2d 37556 | Version of sbcom2 2174 with a context, and distinct variable conditions replaced with distinctors. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑤) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑤 / 𝑧][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑧]𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbalnae 37557 | A theorem used in elimination of disjoint variable restrictions by replacing them with distinctors. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧) → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbal1 37558* | A theorem used in elimination of disjoint variable restriction on 𝑥 and 𝑦 by replacing it with a distinctor ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑧. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1993.) Proof is based on wl-sbalnae 37557 now. See also sbal1 2527. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbal2 37559* | Move quantifier in and out of substitution. Revised to remove a distinct variable constraint. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) Proof is based on wl-sbalnae 37557 now. See also sbal2 2528. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-2spsbbi 37560 | spsbbi 2074 applied twice. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Aug-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑎∀𝑏(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ([𝑦 / 𝑏][𝑥 / 𝑎]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑏][𝑥 / 𝑎]𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-lem-exsb 37561* | This theorem provides a basic working step in proving theorems about ∃* or ∃!. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-lem-nexmo 37562 | This theorem provides a basic working step in proving theorems about ∃* or ∃!. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-lem-moexsb 37563* |
The antecedent ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧) relates to ∃*𝑥𝜑, but is
better suited for usage in proofs. Note that no distinct variable
restriction is placed on 𝜑.
This theorem provides a basic working step in proving theorems about ∃* or ∃!. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧) → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-alanbii 37564 | This theorem extends alanimi 1816 to a biconditional. Recurrent usage stacks up more quantifiers. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∀𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-mo2df 37565 | Version of mof 2557 with a context and a distinctor replacing a distinct variable condition. This version should be used only to eliminate disjoint variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-mo2tf 37566 | Closed form of mof 2557 with a distinctor avoiding distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-eudf 37567 | Version of eu6 2568 with a context and a distinctor replacing a distinct variable condition. This version should be used only to eliminate disjoint variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜓 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-eutf 37568 | Closed form of eu6 2568 with a distinctor avoiding distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-euequf 37569 | euequ 2591 proved with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-mo2t 37570* | Closed form of mof 2557. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-mo3t 37571* | Closed form of mo3 2558. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfsbtv 37572* | Closed form of nfsbv 2329. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 2-May-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8eut 37573 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8eu 2594. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8eutv 37574* | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8euv 2593. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-May-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8mot 37575 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8mo 2595. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8motv 37576* |
Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of
sb8mo 2595 without ax-13 2371, but requiring 𝑥 and 𝑦 being
disjoint.
This theorem relates to wl-mo3t 37571, since replacing 𝜑 with [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 in the latter yields subexpressions like [𝑥 / 𝑦][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑, which can be reduced to 𝜑 via sbft 2270 and sbco 2506. So ∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 is provable from wl-mo3t 37571 in a simple fashion. From an educational standpoint, one would assume wl-mo3t 37571 to be more fundamental, as it hints how the "at most one" objects on both sides of the biconditional correlate (they are the same), if they exist at all, and then prove this theorem from it. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-May-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-issetft 37577 | A closed form of issetf 3467. The proof here is a modification of a subproof in vtoclgft 3521, where it could be used to shorten the proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jan-2025.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 → (𝐴 ∈ V ↔ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-axc11rc11 37578 |
Proving axc11r 2367 from axc11 2429. The hypotheses are two instances of
axc11 2429 used in the proof here. Some systems
introduce axc11 2429 as an
axiom, see for example System S2 in
https://us.metamath.org/downloads/finiteaxiom.pdf 2429.
By contrast, this database sees the variant axc11r 2367, directly derived from ax-12 2178, as foundational. Later axc11 2429 is proven somewhat trickily, requiring ax-10 2142 and ax-13 2371, see its proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → ∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑥)) & ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Axiom | ax-wl-11v 37579* | Version of ax-11 2158 with distinct variable conditions. Currently implemented as an axiom to detect unintended references to the foundational axiom ax-11 2158. It will later be converted into a theorem directly based on ax-11 2158. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem1 37580 | A transitive law for variable identifying expressions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 ↔ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem2 37581* | Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑥 𝑢 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem3 37582* | Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem4 37583* | Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem5 37584 | Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑢[𝑢 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem6 37585* | Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (∀𝑢∀𝑥[𝑢 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem7 37586 | Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem8 37587* | Lemma. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑢 𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (∀𝑢∀𝑥[𝑢 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem9 37588 | The easy part when 𝑥 coincides with 𝑦. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-ax11-lem10 37589* | We now have prepared everything. The unwanted variable 𝑢 is just in one place left. pm2.61 192 can be used in conjunction with wl-ax11-lem9 37588 to eliminate the second antecedent. Missing is something along the lines of ax-6 1967, so we could remove the first antecedent. But the Metamath axioms cannot accomplish this. Such a rule must reside one abstraction level higher than all others: It says that a distinctor implies a distinct variable condition on its contained setvar. This is only needed if such conditions are required, as ax-11v does. The result of this study is for me, that you cannot introduce a setvar capturing this condition, and hope to eliminate it later. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑢 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-clabv 37590* |
Variant of df-clab 2709, where the element 𝑥 is required to be
disjoint from the class it is taken from. This restriction meets
similar ones found in other definitions and axioms like ax-ext 2702,
df-clel 2804 and df-cleq 2722. 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 with 𝐴 depending on 𝑥 can
be the source of side effects, that you rather want to be aware of. So
here we eliminate one possible way of letting this slip in instead.
An expression 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 with 𝑥, 𝐴 not disjoint, is now only introduced either via ax-8 2111, ax-9 2119, or df-clel 2804. Theorem cleljust 2118 shows that a possible choice does not matter. The original df-clab 2709 can be rederived, see wl-dfclab 37591. In an implementation this theorem is the only user of df-clab. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) Element and class are disjoint. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 31-May-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-dfclab 37591 | Rederive df-clab 2709 from wl-clabv 37590. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-May-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-clabtv 37592* | Using class abstraction in a context, requiring 𝑥 and 𝜑 disjoint, but based on fewer axioms than wl-clabt 37593. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)}) | ||
| Theorem | wl-clabt 37593 | Using class abstraction in a context. For a version based on fewer axioms see wl-clabtv 37592. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)}) | ||
| Theorem | rabiun 37594* | Abstraction restricted to an indexed union. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 26-Oct-2017.) |
| ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ ∪ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∣ 𝜑} = ∪ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 {𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | iundif1 37595* | Indexed union of class difference with the subtrahend held constant. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 6-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐵 ∖ 𝐶) = (∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∖ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | imadifss 37596 | The difference of images is a subset of the image of the difference. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐹 “ 𝐴) ∖ (𝐹 “ 𝐵)) ⊆ (𝐹 “ (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | cureq 37597 | Equality theorem for currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → curry 𝐴 = curry 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | unceq 37598 | Equality theorem for uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → uncurry 𝐴 = uncurry 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | curf 37599 | Functional property of currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ {∅}) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑊) → curry 𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | uncf 37600 | Functional property of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) → uncurry 𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |