P. 377 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 37601-37700   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	wl-nfeqfb 37601	Extend nfeqf 2383 to an equivalence. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-nfs1t 37602	If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. Closed form of nfs1 2490. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-equsalvw 37603*	Version of equsalv 2272 with a disjoint variable condition, and of equsal 2419 with two disjoint variable conditions, which requires fewer axioms. See also the dual form equsexvw 2006. 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 2026 and cbvalvw 2037 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 37604	Deduction version of equsal 2419. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	wl-equsaldv 37605*	Deduction version of equsal 2419. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	wl-equsal 37606	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 37604 first, and then deriving more specialized versions wl-equsal 37606 and wl-equsal1t 37607 then is more efficient than the other way round, which is possible, too. See also equsal 2419. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	wl-equsal1t 37607	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 2419, spimt 2388 or sbft 2274, to which it is related. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 19-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	wl-equsalcom 37608	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 37609	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 37610*	A more general version of sbid2vw 2264. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 14-May-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	wl-cbvalsbi 37611*	Change bounded variables in a special case. The reverse direction seems to involve ax-11 2162. My hope is that I will in some future be able to prove mo3 2561 with reversed quantifiers not using ax-11 2162. See also the remark in mo4 2563, which lead me to this effort. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2024.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-sbrimt 37612	Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2308. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)))
Theorem	wl-sblimt 37613	Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2308. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	wl-sb9v 37614*	Commutation of quantification and substitution variables based on fewer axioms than sb9 2521. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥[𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-sb8ft 37615*	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8f 2356. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8eft 37616*	Substitution of variable in existentialal quantifier. Closed form of sb8ef 2357. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8t 37617	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8 2519. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8et 37618	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8e 2520. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sbhbt 37619	Closed form of sbhb 2523. 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 37620	Two ways expressing that 𝑥 is effectively not free in 𝜑. Simplified version of sbnf2 2360. Note: This theorem shows that sbnf2 2360 has unnecessary distinct variable constraints. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-equsb3 37621	equsb3 2108 with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-equsb4 37622	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 37623	Version of 2sb6 2091 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 37624*	Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 37626. (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 37625*	Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 37626. (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 37626	Version of sbcom2 2178 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 37627	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 37628*	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 37627 now. See also sbal1 2530. (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 37629*	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 37627 now. See also sbal2 2531. (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 37630	spsbbi 2078 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 37631*	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 37632	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 37633*	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 37634	This theorem extends alanimi 1817 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 37635	Version of mof 2560 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 37636	Closed form of mof 2560 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 37637	Version of eu6 2571 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 37638	Closed form of eu6 2571 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 37639	euequ 2594 proved with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-mo2t 37640*	Closed form of mof 2560. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-mo3t 37641*	Closed form of mo3 2561. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-nfsbtv 37642*	Closed form of nfsbv 2333. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 2-May-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-sb8eut 37643	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8eu 2597. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8eutv 37644*	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8euv 2596. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-May-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8mot 37645	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8mo 2598. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8motv 37646*	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8mo 2598 without ax-13 2374, but requiring 𝑥 and 𝑦 being disjoint. This theorem relates to wl-mo3t 37641, 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 2274 and sbco 2509. So ∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 is provable from wl-mo3t 37641 in a simple fashion. From an educational standpoint, one would assume wl-mo3t 37641 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 37647	A closed form of issetf 3454. The proof here is a modification of a subproof in vtoclgft 3506, 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 37648	Proving axc11r 2370 from axc11 2432. The hypotheses are two instances of axc11 2432 used in the proof here. Some systems introduce axc11 2432 as an axiom, see for example System S2 in https://us.metamath.org/downloads/finiteaxiom.pdf 2432. By contrast, this database sees the variant axc11r 2370, directly derived from ax-12 2182, as foundational. Later axc11 2432 is proven somewhat trickily, requiring ax-10 2146 and ax-13 2374, 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))
Theorem	wl-clabv 37649*	Variant of df-clab 2712, 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 2705, df-clel 2808 and df-cleq 2725. 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 2115, ax-9 2123, or df-clel 2808. Theorem cleljust 2122 shows that a possible choice does not matter. The original df-clab 2712 can be rederived, see wl-dfclab 37650. 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 37650	Rederive df-clab 2712 from wl-clabv 37649. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-May-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-clabtv 37651*	Using class abstraction in a context, requiring 𝑥 and 𝜑 disjoint, but based on fewer axioms than wl-clabt 37652. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)})
Theorem	wl-clabt 37652	Using class abstraction in a context. For a version based on fewer axioms see wl-clabtv 37651. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)})
Theorem	wl-eujustlem1 37653*	Version of cbvexvw 2038 with references to ax-6 1968 listed as antecedents. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Feb-2026.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((∀𝑦∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥∃𝑦 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜓))
21.23  Mathbox for Brendan Leahy
Theorem	rabiun 37654*	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 37655*	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 37656	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 37657	Equality theorem for currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → curry 𝐴 = curry 𝐵)
Theorem	unceq 37658	Equality theorem for uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → uncurry 𝐴 = uncurry 𝐵)
Theorem	curf 37659	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 37660	Functional property of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) → uncurry 𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶)
Theorem	curfv 37661	Value of currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (((𝐹 Fn (𝑉 × 𝑊) ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ 𝑊 ∈ 𝑋) → ((curry 𝐹‘𝐴)‘𝐵) = (𝐴𝐹𝐵))
Theorem	uncov 37662	Value of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴uncurry 𝐹𝐵) = ((𝐹‘𝐴)‘𝐵))
Theorem	curunc 37663	Currying of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) ∧ 𝐵 ≠ ∅) → curry uncurry 𝐹 = 𝐹)
Theorem	unccur 37664	Uncurrying of currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 5-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ {∅}) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑊) → uncurry curry 𝐹 = 𝐹)
Theorem	phpreu 37665*	Theorem related to pigeonhole principle. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ Fin ∧ 𝐴 ≈ 𝐵) → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑥 = 𝐶 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑥 = 𝐶))
Theorem	finixpnum 37666*	A finite Cartesian product of numerable sets is numerable. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 24-Feb-2019.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ Fin ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ dom card) → X𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ dom card)
Theorem	fin2solem 37667*	Lemma for fin2so 37668. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 29-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝑥 ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥)) → (𝑦𝑅𝑧 → {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑦} [⊊] {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑧}))
Theorem	fin2so 37668	Any totally ordered Tarski-finite set is finite; in particular, no amorphous set can be ordered. Theorem 2 of [Levy58]] p. 4. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 28-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ FinII ∧ 𝑅 Or 𝐴) → 𝐴 ∈ Fin)
Theorem	ltflcei 37669	Theorem to move the floor function across a strict inequality. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 25-Oct-2017.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℝ) → ((⌊‘𝐴) < 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 < -(⌊‘-𝐵)))
Theorem	leceifl 37670	Theorem to move the floor function across a non-strict inequality. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 25-Oct-2017.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℝ) → (-(⌊‘-𝐴) ≤ 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ≤ (⌊‘𝐵)))
Theorem	sin2h 37671	Half-angle rule for sine. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 3-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (0[,](2 · π)) → (sin‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 − (cos‘𝐴)) / 2)))
Theorem	cos2h 37672	Half-angle rule for cosine. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (-π[,]π) → (cos‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 + (cos‘𝐴)) / 2)))
Theorem	tan2h 37673	Half-angle rule for tangent. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (0[,)π) → (tan‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 − (cos‘𝐴)) / (1 + (cos‘𝐴)))))
Theorem	lindsadd 37674	In a vector space, the union of an independent set and a vector not in its span is an independent set. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Mar-2023.)
⊢ ((𝑊 ∈ LVec ∧ 𝐹 ∈ (LIndS‘𝑊) ∧ 𝑋 ∈ ((Base‘𝑊) ∖ ((LSpan‘𝑊)‘𝐹))) → (𝐹 ∪ {𝑋}) ∈ (LIndS‘𝑊))
Theorem	lindsdom 37675	A linearly independent set in a free linear module of finite dimension over a division ring is smaller than the dimension of the module. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝑅 ∈ DivRing ∧ 𝐼 ∈ Fin ∧ 𝑋 ∈ (LIndS‘(𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼))) → 𝑋 ≼ 𝐼)
Theorem	lindsenlbs 37676	A maximal linearly independent set in a free module of finite dimension over a division ring is a basis. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (((𝑅 ∈ DivRing ∧ 𝐼 ∈ Fin ∧ 𝑋 ∈ (LIndS‘(𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼))) ∧ 𝑋 ≈ 𝐼) → 𝑋 ∈ (LBasis‘(𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼)))
Theorem	matunitlindflem1 37677	One direction of matunitlindf 37679. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (((𝑅 ∈ Field ∧ 𝑀:(𝐼 × 𝐼)⟶(Base‘𝑅)) ∧ 𝐼 ∈ (Fin ∖ {∅})) → (¬ curry 𝑀 LIndF (𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼) → ((𝐼 maDet 𝑅)‘𝑀) = (0g‘𝑅)))
Theorem	matunitlindflem2 37678	One direction of matunitlindf 37679. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((((𝑅 ∈ Field ∧ 𝑀 ∈ (Base‘(𝐼 Mat 𝑅))) ∧ 𝐼 ≠ ∅) ∧ curry 𝑀 LIndF (𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼)) → ((𝐼 maDet 𝑅)‘𝑀) ∈ (Unit‘𝑅))
Theorem	matunitlindf 37679	A matrix over a field is invertible iff the rows are linearly independent. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝑅 ∈ Field ∧ 𝑀 ∈ (Base‘(𝐼 Mat 𝑅))) → (𝑀 ∈ (Unit‘(𝐼 Mat 𝑅)) ↔ curry 𝑀 LIndF (𝑅 freeLMod 𝐼)))
Theorem	ptrest 37680*	Expressing a restriction of a product topology as a product topology. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 24-Mar-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶Top)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑘 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑆 ∈ 𝑊)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((∏t‘𝐹) ↾t X𝑘 ∈ 𝐴 𝑆) = (∏t‘(𝑘 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ ((𝐹‘𝑘) ↾t 𝑆))))
Theorem	ptrecube 37681*	Any point in an open set of N-space is surrounded by an open cube within that set. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) (Proof shortened by AV, 28-Sep-2020.)
⊢ 𝑅 = (∏t‘((1...𝑁) × {(topGen‘ran (,))}))    &   ⊢ 𝐷 = ((abs ∘ − ) ↾ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑆 ∈ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑃 ∈ 𝑆) → ∃𝑑 ∈ ℝ+ X𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝑃‘𝑛)(ball‘𝐷)𝑑) ⊆ 𝑆)
Theorem	poimirlem1 37682*	Lemma for poimir 37714- the vertices on either side of a skipped vertex differ in at least two dimensions. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < 𝑀, 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌(𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0})))))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑁)⟶ℤ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∃*𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 1))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘𝑀)‘𝑛))
Theorem	poimirlem2 37683*	Lemma for poimir 37714- consecutive vertices differ in at most one dimension. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < 𝑀, 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌(𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0})))))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑁)⟶ℤ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑉 ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ((0...𝑁) ∖ {𝑉}))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑉 − 1))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘𝑉)‘𝑛))
Theorem	poimirlem3 37684*	Lemma for poimir 37714 to add an interior point to an admissible face on the back face of the cube. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐾 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ℕ0)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 < 𝑁)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑀)⟶(0..^𝐾))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑀)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑀))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋((𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑀)) × {0}))) ∪ (((𝑀 + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵 → (⟨(𝑇 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), 0⟩}), (𝑈 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)⟩})⟩ ∈ (((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...(𝑀 + 1))) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...(𝑀 + 1))–1-1-onto→(1...(𝑀 + 1))}) ∧ (∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋(((𝑇 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), 0⟩}) ∘f + ((((𝑈 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)⟩}) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((𝑈 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)⟩}) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...(𝑀 + 1))) × {0}))) ∪ ((((𝑀 + 1) + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵 ∧ ((𝑇 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), 0⟩})‘(𝑀 + 1)) = 0 ∧ ((𝑈 ∪ {⟨(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)⟩})‘(𝑀 + 1)) = (𝑀 + 1)))))
Theorem	poimirlem4 37685*	Lemma for poimir 37714 connecting the admissible faces on the back face of the (𝑀 + 1)-cube to admissible simplices in the 𝑀-cube. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐾 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ℕ0)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 < 𝑁)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑠 ∈ (((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑀)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑀)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑀)}) ∣ ∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋(((1st ‘𝑠) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘𝑠) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘𝑠) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑀)) × {0}))) ∪ (((𝑀 + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵} ≈ {𝑠 ∈ (((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...(𝑀 + 1))) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...(𝑀 + 1))–1-1-onto→(1...(𝑀 + 1))}) ∣ (∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋(((1st ‘𝑠) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘𝑠) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘𝑠) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...(𝑀 + 1))) × {0}))) ∪ ((((𝑀 + 1) + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵 ∧ ((1st ‘𝑠)‘(𝑀 + 1)) = 0 ∧ ((2nd ‘𝑠)‘(𝑀 + 1)) = (𝑀 + 1))})
Theorem	poimirlem5 37686*	Lemma for poimir 37714 to establish that, for the simplices defined by a walk along the edges of an 𝑁-cube, if the starting vertex is not opposite a given face, it is the earliest vertex of the face on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 0 < (2nd ‘𝑇))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹‘0) = (1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇)))
Theorem	poimirlem6 37687*	Lemma for poimir 37714 establishing, for a face of a simplex defined by a walk along the edges of an 𝑁-cube, the single dimension in which successive vertices before the opposite vertex differ. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (1...((2nd ‘𝑇) − 1)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 1))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘𝑀)‘𝑛)) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑀))
Theorem	poimirlem7 37688*	Lemma for poimir 37714, similar to poimirlem6 37687, but for vertices after the opposite vertex. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ((((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1) + 1)...𝑁))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 2))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 1))‘𝑛)) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑀))
Theorem	poimirlem8 37689*	Lemma for poimir 37714, establishing that away from the opposite vertex the walks in poimirlem9 37690 yield the same vertices. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)})) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)})))
Theorem	poimirlem9 37690*	Lemma for poimir 37714, establishing the two walks that yield a given face when the opposite vertex is neither first nor last. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) ≠ (2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ ({⟨(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)⟩, ⟨((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1), (2nd ‘𝑇)⟩} ∪ ( I ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)})))))
Theorem	poimirlem10 37691*	Lemma for poimir 37714 establishing the cube that yields the simplex that yields a face if the opposite vertex was first on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐹‘(𝑁 − 1)) ∘f − ((1...𝑁) × {1})) = (1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇)))
Theorem	poimirlem11 37692*	Lemma for poimir 37714 connecting walks that could yield from a given cube a given face opposite the first vertex of the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑈) = 0)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (1...𝑁))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) “ (1...𝑀)) ⊆ ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) “ (1...𝑀)))
Theorem	poimirlem12 37693*	Lemma for poimir 37714 connecting walks that could yield from a given cube a given face opposite the final vertex of the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 𝑁)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑈) = 𝑁)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) “ (1...𝑀)) ⊆ ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) “ (1...𝑀)))
Theorem	poimirlem13 37694*	Lemma for poimir 37714- for at most one simplex associated with a shared face is the opposite vertex first on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 (2nd ‘𝑧) = 0)
Theorem	poimirlem14 37695*	Lemma for poimir 37714- for at most one simplex associated with a shared face is the opposite vertex last on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 (2nd ‘𝑧) = 𝑁)
Theorem	poimirlem15 37696*	Lemma for poimir 37714, that the face in poimirlem22 37703 is a face. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ⟨⟨(1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇)), ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ ({⟨(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)⟩, ⟨((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1), (2nd ‘𝑇)⟩} ∪ ( I ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)}))))⟩, (2nd ‘𝑇)⟩ ∈ 𝑆)
Theorem	poimirlem16 37697*	Lemma for poimir 37714 establishing the vertices of the simplex of poimirlem17 37698. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 𝐾)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ((𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ (((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑛) + if(𝑛 = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘1), 1, 0))) ∘f + (((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ (𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ if(𝑛 = 𝑁, 1, (𝑛 + 1)))) “ (1...𝑦)) × {1}) ∪ ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ (𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ if(𝑛 = 𝑁, 1, (𝑛 + 1)))) “ ((𝑦 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0})))))
Theorem	poimirlem17 37698*	Lemma for poimir 37714 establishing existence for poimirlem18 37699. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 𝐾)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 𝑧 ≠ 𝑇)
Theorem	poimirlem18 37699*	Lemma for poimir 37714 stating that, given a face not on a front face of the main cube and a simplex in which it's opposite the first vertex on the walk, there exists exactly one other simplex containing it. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 𝐾)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃!𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 𝑧 ≠ 𝑇)
Theorem	poimirlem19 37700*	Lemma for poimir 37714 establishing the vertices of the simplex in poimirlem20 37701. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ)    &   ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 0)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 𝑁)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ((𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ (((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑛) − if(𝑛 = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑁), 1, 0))) ∘f + (((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ (𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ if(𝑛 = 1, 𝑁, (𝑛 − 1)))) “ (1...(𝑦 + 1))) × {1}) ∪ ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ (𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ if(𝑛 = 1, 𝑁, (𝑛 − 1)))) “ (((𝑦 + 1) + 1)...𝑁)) × {0})))))