P. 379 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Type

Label

Description

Statement

Theorem

exlimimd 37801*

Existential elimination rule of natural deduction. (Contributed by ML, 17-Jul-2020.)

⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)

Theorem

exellim 37802*

Closed form of exellimddv 37803. See also exlimim 37800 for a more general theorem. (Contributed by ML, 17-Jul-2020.)

⊢ ((∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜑)) → 𝜑)

Theorem

exellimddv 37803*

Eliminate an antecedent when the antecedent is elementhood, deduction version. See exellim 37802 for the closed form, which requires the use of a universal quantifier. (Contributed by ML, 17-Jul-2020.)

⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)

Theorem

topdifinfindis 37804*

Part of Exercise 3 of [Munkres] p. 83. The topology of all subsets 𝑥 of 𝐴 such that the complement of 𝑥 in 𝐴 is infinite, or 𝑥 is the empty set, or 𝑥 is all of 𝐴, is the trivial topology when 𝐴 is finite. (Contributed by ML, 14-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝑇 = {𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 𝐴 ∣ (¬ (𝐴 ∖ 𝑥) ∈ Fin ∨ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝑥 = 𝐴))}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ Fin → 𝑇 = {∅, 𝐴})

Theorem

topdifinffinlem 37805*

This is the core of the proof of topdifinffin 37806, but to avoid the distinct variables on the definition, we need to split this proof into two. (Contributed by ML, 17-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝑇 = {𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 𝐴 ∣ (¬ (𝐴 ∖ 𝑥) ∈ Fin ∨ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝑥 = 𝐴))}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑇 ∈ (TopOn‘𝐴) → 𝐴 ∈ Fin)

Theorem

topdifinffin 37806*

Part of Exercise 3 of [Munkres] p. 83. The topology of all subsets 𝑥 of 𝐴 such that the complement of 𝑥 in 𝐴 is infinite, or 𝑥 is the empty set, or 𝑥 is all of 𝐴, is a topology only if 𝐴 is finite. (Contributed by ML, 17-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝑇 = {𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 𝐴 ∣ (¬ (𝐴 ∖ 𝑥) ∈ Fin ∨ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝑥 = 𝐴))}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑇 ∈ (TopOn‘𝐴) → 𝐴 ∈ Fin)

Theorem

topdifinf 37807*

Part of Exercise 3 of [Munkres] p. 83. The topology of all subsets 𝑥 of 𝐴 such that the complement of 𝑥 in 𝐴 is infinite, or 𝑥 is the empty set, or 𝑥 is all of 𝐴, is a topology if and only if 𝐴 is finite, in which case it is the trivial topology. (Contributed by ML, 17-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝑇 = {𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 𝐴 ∣ (¬ (𝐴 ∖ 𝑥) ∈ Fin ∨ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝑥 = 𝐴))}    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑇 ∈ (TopOn‘𝐴) ↔ 𝐴 ∈ Fin) ∧ (𝑇 ∈ (TopOn‘𝐴) → 𝑇 = {∅, 𝐴}))

Theorem

topdifinfeq 37808*

Two different ways of defining the collection from Exercise 3 of [Munkres] p. 83. (Contributed by ML, 18-Jul-2020.)

⊢ {𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 𝐴 ∣ (¬ (𝐴 ∖ 𝑥) ∈ Fin ∨ ((𝐴 ∖ 𝑥) = ∅ ∨ (𝐴 ∖ 𝑥) = 𝐴))} = {𝑥 ∈ 𝒫 𝐴 ∣ (¬ (𝐴 ∖ 𝑥) ∈ Fin ∨ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ 𝑥 = 𝐴))}

Theorem

icorempo 37809*

Closed-below, open-above intervals of reals. (Contributed by ML, 26-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝐹 = ([,) ↾ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ ℝ, 𝑦 ∈ ℝ ↦ {𝑧 ∈ ℝ ∣ (𝑥 ≤ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 < 𝑦)})

Theorem

icoreresf 37810

Closed-below, open-above intervals of reals map to subsets of reals. (Contributed by ML, 25-Jul-2020.)

⊢ ([,) ↾ (ℝ × ℝ)):(ℝ × ℝ)⟶𝒫 ℝ

Theorem

icoreval 37811*

Value of the closed-below, open-above interval function on reals. (Contributed by ML, 26-Jul-2020.)

⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℝ) → (𝐴[,)𝐵) = {𝑧 ∈ ℝ ∣ (𝐴 ≤ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 < 𝐵)})

Theorem

icoreelrnab 37812*

Elementhood in the set of closed-below, open-above intervals of reals. (Contributed by ML, 27-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ 𝐼 ↔ ∃𝑎 ∈ ℝ ∃𝑏 ∈ ℝ 𝑋 = {𝑧 ∈ ℝ ∣ (𝑎 ≤ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 < 𝑏)})

Theorem

isbasisrelowllem1 37813*

Lemma for isbasisrelowl 37816. (Contributed by ML, 27-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝑎 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝑏 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝑥 = {𝑧 ∈ ℝ ∣ (𝑎 ≤ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 < 𝑏)}) ∧ (𝑐 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝑑 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑧 ∈ ℝ ∣ (𝑐 ≤ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 < 𝑑)})) ∧ (𝑎 ≤ 𝑐 ∧ 𝑏 ≤ 𝑑)) → (𝑥 ∩ 𝑦) ∈ 𝐼)

Theorem

isbasisrelowllem2 37814*

Lemma for isbasisrelowl 37816. (Contributed by ML, 27-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝑎 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝑏 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝑥 = {𝑧 ∈ ℝ ∣ (𝑎 ≤ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 < 𝑏)}) ∧ (𝑐 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝑑 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝑦 = {𝑧 ∈ ℝ ∣ (𝑐 ≤ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 < 𝑑)})) ∧ (𝑎 ≤ 𝑐 ∧ 𝑑 ≤ 𝑏)) → (𝑥 ∩ 𝑦) ∈ 𝐼)

Theorem

icoreclin 37815*

The set of closed-below, open-above intervals of reals is closed under finite intersection. (Contributed by ML, 27-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐼 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐼) → (𝑥 ∩ 𝑦) ∈ 𝐼)

Theorem

isbasisrelowl 37816

The set of all closed-below, open-above intervals of reals form a basis. (Contributed by ML, 27-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐼 ∈ TopBases

Theorem

icoreunrn 37817

The union of all closed-below, open-above intervals of reals is the set of reals. (Contributed by ML, 27-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ ℝ = ∪ 𝐼

Theorem

istoprelowl 37818

The set of all closed-below, open-above intervals of reals generate a topology on the reals. (Contributed by ML, 27-Jul-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ (topGen‘𝐼) ∈ (TopOn‘ℝ)

Theorem

icoreelrn 37819*

A class abstraction which is an element of the set of closed-below, open-above intervals of reals. (Contributed by ML, 1-Aug-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℝ) → {𝑧 ∈ ℝ ∣ (𝐴 ≤ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 < 𝐵)} ∈ 𝐼)

Theorem

iooelexlt 37820*

An element of an open interval is not its smallest element. (Contributed by ML, 2-Aug-2020.)

⊢ (𝑋 ∈ (𝐴(,)𝐵) → ∃𝑦 ∈ (𝐴(,)𝐵)𝑦 < 𝑋)

Theorem

relowlssretop 37821

The lower limit topology on the reals is finer than the standard topology. (Contributed by ML, 1-Aug-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ (topGen‘ran (,)) ⊆ (topGen‘𝐼)

Theorem

relowlpssretop 37822

The lower limit topology on the reals is strictly finer than the standard topology. (Contributed by ML, 2-Aug-2020.)

⊢ 𝐼 = ([,) “ (ℝ × ℝ))    ⇒   ⊢ (topGen‘ran (,)) ⊊ (topGen‘𝐼)

Theorem

sucneqond 37823

Inequality of an ordinal set with its successor. Does not use the axiom of regularity. (Contributed by ML, 18-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 = suc 𝑌)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ On)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ≠ 𝑌)

Theorem

sucneqoni 37824

Inequality of an ordinal set with its successor. Does not use the axiom of regularity. (Contributed by ML, 18-Oct-2020.)

⊢ 𝑋 = suc 𝑌    &   ⊢ 𝑌 ∈ On    ⇒   ⊢ 𝑋 ≠ 𝑌

Theorem

onsucuni3 37825

If an ordinal number has a predecessor, then it is successor of that predecessor. (Contributed by ML, 17-Oct-2020.)

⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ≠ ∅ ∧ ¬ Lim 𝐵) → 𝐵 = suc ∪ 𝐵)

Theorem

1oequni2o 37826

The ordinal number 1_o is the predecessor of the ordinal number 2_o. (Contributed by ML, 19-Oct-2020.)

⊢ 1_o = ∪ 2_o

Theorem

rdgsucuni 37827

If an ordinal number has a predecessor, the value of the recursive definition generator at that number in terms of its predecessor. (Contributed by ML, 17-Oct-2020.)

⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ On ∧ 𝐵 ≠ ∅ ∧ ¬ Lim 𝐵) → (rec(𝐹, 𝐼)‘𝐵) = (𝐹‘(rec(𝐹, 𝐼)‘∪ 𝐵)))

Theorem

rdgeqoa 37828

If a recursive function with an initial value 𝐴 at step 𝑁 is equal to itself with an initial value 𝐵 at step 𝑀, then every finite number of successor steps will also be equal. (Contributed by ML, 21-Oct-2020.)

⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ On ∧ 𝑀 ∈ On ∧ 𝑋 ∈ ω) → ((rec(𝐹, 𝐴)‘𝑁) = (rec(𝐹, 𝐵)‘𝑀) → (rec(𝐹, 𝐴)‘(𝑁 +_o 𝑋)) = (rec(𝐹, 𝐵)‘(𝑀 +_o 𝑋))))

Theorem

elxp8 37829

Membership in a Cartesian product. This version requires no quantifiers or dummy variables. See also elxp7 8001. (Contributed by ML, 19-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (𝐵 × 𝐶) ↔ ((1^st ‘𝐴) ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ (V × 𝐶)))

Theorem

cbveud 37830*

Deduction used to change bound variables in an existential uniqueness quantifier, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by ML, 27-Mar-2021.)

⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜒))

Theorem

cbvreud 37831*

Deduction used to change bound variables in a restricted existential uniqueness quantifier. (Contributed by ML, 27-Mar-2021.)

⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝜒))

Theorem

difunieq 37832

The difference of unions is a subset of the union of the difference. (Contributed by ML, 29-Mar-2021.)

⊢ (∪ 𝐴 ∖ ∪ 𝐵) ⊆ ∪ (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵)

Theorem

inunissunidif 37833

Theorem about subsets of the difference of unions. (Contributed by ML, 29-Mar-2021.)

⊢ ((𝐴 ∩ ∪ 𝐶) = ∅ → (𝐴 ⊆ ∪ 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ ∪ (𝐵 ∖ 𝐶)))

Theorem

rdgellim 37834

Elementhood in a recursive definition at a limit ordinal. (Contributed by ML, 30-Mar-2022.)

⊢ (((𝐵 ∈ On ∧ Lim 𝐵) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵) → (𝑋 ∈ (rec(𝐹, 𝐴)‘𝐶) → 𝑋 ∈ (rec(𝐹, 𝐴)‘𝐵)))

Theorem

rdglimss 37835

A recursive definition at a limit ordinal is a superset of itself at any smaller ordinal. (Contributed by ML, 30-Mar-2022.)

⊢ (((𝐵 ∈ On ∧ Lim 𝐵) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵) → (rec(𝐹, 𝐴)‘𝐶) ⊆ (rec(𝐹, 𝐴)‘𝐵))

Theorem

rdgssun 37836*

In a recursive definition where each step expands on the previous one using a union, every previous step is a subset of every later step. (Contributed by ML, 1-Apr-2022.)

⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑤 ∈ V ↦ (𝑤 ∪ 𝐵))    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑋 ∈ On ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝑋) → (rec(𝐹, 𝐴)‘𝑌) ⊆ (rec(𝐹, 𝐴)‘𝑋))

Theorem

exrecfnlem 37837*

Lemma for exrecfn 37838. (Contributed by ML, 30-Mar-2022.)

⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑧 ∈ V ↦ (𝑧 ∪ ran (𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ↦ 𝐵)))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∀𝑦 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → ∃𝑥(𝐴 ⊆ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝐵 ∈ 𝑥))

Theorem

exrecfn 37838*

Theorem about the existence of infinite recursive sets. 𝑦 should usually be free in 𝐵. (Contributed by ML, 30-Mar-2022.)

⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∀𝑦 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → ∃𝑥(𝐴 ⊆ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝐵 ∈ 𝑥))

Theorem

exrecfnpw 37839*

For any base set, a set which contains the powerset of all of its own elements exists. (Contributed by ML, 30-Mar-2022.)

⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ∃𝑥(𝐴 ⊆ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝒫 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥))

Theorem

finorwe 37840

If the Axiom of Infinity is denied, every total order is a well-order. The notion of a well-order cannot be usefully expressed without the Axiom of Infinity due to the inability to quantify over proper classes. (Contributed by ML, 5-Oct-2023.)

⊢ (¬ ω ∈ V → ( < Or 𝐴 → < We 𝐴))

21.21.2  Cartesian exponentiation

Syntax

cfinxp 37841

Extend the definition of a class to include Cartesian exponentiation.

class (𝑈↑↑𝑁)

Definition

df-finxp 37842*

Define Cartesian exponentiation on a class.

Note that this definition is limited to finite exponents, since it is defined using nested ordered pairs. If tuples of infinite length are needed, or if they might be needed in the future, use df-ixp 8876 or df-map 8805 instead. The main advantage of this definition is that it integrates better with functions and relations. For example if 𝑅 is a subset of (𝐴↑↑2_o), then df-br 5100 can be used on it, and df-fv 6525 can also be used, and so on.

It's also worth keeping in mind that ((𝑈↑↑𝑀) × (𝑈↑↑𝑁)) is generally not equal to (𝑈↑↑(𝑀 +_o 𝑁)).

This definition is technical. Use finxp1o 37850 and finxpsuc 37856 for a more standard recursive experience. (Contributed by ML, 16-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝑈↑↑𝑁) = {𝑦 ∣ (𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ ∅ = (rec((𝑛 ∈ ω, 𝑥 ∈ V ↦ if((𝑛 = 1_o ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈), ∅, if(𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈), ⟨∪ 𝑛, (1^st ‘𝑥)⟩, ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩))), ⟨𝑁, 𝑦⟩)‘𝑁))}

Theorem

dffinxpf 37843*

This theorem is the same as Definition df-finxp 37842, except that the large function is replaced by a class variable for brevity. (Contributed by ML, 24-Oct-2020.)

⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑛 ∈ ω, 𝑥 ∈ V ↦ if((𝑛 = 1_o ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈), ∅, if(𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈), ⟨∪ 𝑛, (1^st ‘𝑥)⟩, ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑈↑↑𝑁) = {𝑦 ∣ (𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ ∅ = (rec(𝐹, ⟨𝑁, 𝑦⟩)‘𝑁))}

Theorem

finxpeq1 37844

Equality theorem for Cartesian exponentiation. (Contributed by ML, 19-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝑈 = 𝑉 → (𝑈↑↑𝑁) = (𝑉↑↑𝑁))

Theorem

finxpeq2 37845

Equality theorem for Cartesian exponentiation. (Contributed by ML, 19-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝑀 = 𝑁 → (𝑈↑↑𝑀) = (𝑈↑↑𝑁))

Theorem

csbfinxpg 37846*

Distribute proper substitution through Cartesian exponentiation. (Contributed by ML, 25-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝑈↑↑𝑁) = (⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝑈↑↑⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝑁))

Theorem

finxpreclem1 37847*

Lemma for ↑↑ recursion theorems. (Contributed by ML, 17-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝑋 ∈ 𝑈 → ∅ = ((𝑛 ∈ ω, 𝑥 ∈ V ↦ if((𝑛 = 1_o ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈), ∅, if(𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈), ⟨∪ 𝑛, (1^st ‘𝑥)⟩, ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩)))‘⟨1_o, 𝑋⟩))

Theorem

finxpreclem2 37848*

Lemma for ↑↑ recursion theorems. (Contributed by ML, 17-Oct-2020.)

⊢ ((𝑋 ∈ V ∧ ¬ 𝑋 ∈ 𝑈) → ¬ ∅ = ((𝑛 ∈ ω, 𝑥 ∈ V ↦ if((𝑛 = 1_o ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈), ∅, if(𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈), ⟨∪ 𝑛, (1^st ‘𝑥)⟩, ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩)))‘⟨1_o, 𝑋⟩))

Theorem

finxp0 37849

The value of Cartesian exponentiation at zero. (Contributed by ML, 24-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝑈↑↑∅) = ∅

Theorem

finxp1o 37850

The value of Cartesian exponentiation at one. (Contributed by ML, 17-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝑈↑↑1_o) = 𝑈

Theorem

finxpreclem3 37851*

Lemma for ↑↑ recursion theorems. (Contributed by ML, 20-Oct-2020.)

⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑛 ∈ ω, 𝑥 ∈ V ↦ if((𝑛 = 1_o ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈), ∅, if(𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈), ⟨∪ 𝑛, (1^st ‘𝑥)⟩, ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩)))    ⇒   ⊢ (((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ 2_o ⊆ 𝑁) ∧ 𝑋 ∈ (V × 𝑈)) → ⟨∪ 𝑁, (1^st ‘𝑋)⟩ = (𝐹‘⟨𝑁, 𝑋⟩))

Theorem

finxpreclem4 37852*

Lemma for ↑↑ recursion theorems. (Contributed by ML, 23-Oct-2020.)

⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑛 ∈ ω, 𝑥 ∈ V ↦ if((𝑛 = 1_o ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈), ∅, if(𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈), ⟨∪ 𝑛, (1^st ‘𝑥)⟩, ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩)))    ⇒   ⊢ (((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ 2_o ⊆ 𝑁) ∧ 𝑦 ∈ (V × 𝑈)) → (rec(𝐹, ⟨𝑁, 𝑦⟩)‘𝑁) = (rec(𝐹, ⟨∪ 𝑁, (1^st ‘𝑦)⟩)‘∪ 𝑁))

Theorem

finxpreclem5 37853*

Lemma for ↑↑ recursion theorems. (Contributed by ML, 24-Oct-2020.)

⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑛 ∈ ω, 𝑥 ∈ V ↦ if((𝑛 = 1_o ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈), ∅, if(𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈), ⟨∪ 𝑛, (1^st ‘𝑥)⟩, ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩)))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑛 ∈ ω ∧ 1_o ∈ 𝑛) → (¬ 𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈) → (𝐹‘⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩) = ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩))

Theorem

finxpreclem6 37854*

Lemma for ↑↑ recursion theorems. (Contributed by ML, 24-Oct-2020.)

⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑛 ∈ ω, 𝑥 ∈ V ↦ if((𝑛 = 1_o ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈), ∅, if(𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈), ⟨∪ 𝑛, (1^st ‘𝑥)⟩, ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩)))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ 1_o ∈ 𝑁) → (𝑈↑↑𝑁) ⊆ (V × 𝑈))

Theorem

finxpsuclem 37855*

Lemma for finxpsuc 37856. (Contributed by ML, 24-Oct-2020.)

⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑛 ∈ ω, 𝑥 ∈ V ↦ if((𝑛 = 1_o ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈), ∅, if(𝑥 ∈ (V × 𝑈), ⟨∪ 𝑛, (1^st ‘𝑥)⟩, ⟨𝑛, 𝑥⟩)))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ 1_o ⊆ 𝑁) → (𝑈↑↑suc 𝑁) = ((𝑈↑↑𝑁) × 𝑈))

Theorem

finxpsuc 37856

The value of Cartesian exponentiation at a successor. (Contributed by ML, 24-Oct-2020.)

⊢ ((𝑁 ∈ ω ∧ 𝑁 ≠ ∅) → (𝑈↑↑suc 𝑁) = ((𝑈↑↑𝑁) × 𝑈))

Theorem

finxp2o 37857

The value of Cartesian exponentiation at two. (Contributed by ML, 19-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝑈↑↑2_o) = (𝑈 × 𝑈)

Theorem

finxp3o 37858

The value of Cartesian exponentiation at three. (Contributed by ML, 24-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (𝑈↑↑3_o) = ((𝑈 × 𝑈) × 𝑈)

Theorem

finxpnom 37859

Cartesian exponentiation when the exponent is not a natural number defaults to the empty set. (Contributed by ML, 24-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (¬ 𝑁 ∈ ω → (𝑈↑↑𝑁) = ∅)

Theorem

finxp00 37860

Cartesian exponentiation of the empty set to any power is the empty set. (Contributed by ML, 24-Oct-2020.)

⊢ (∅↑↑𝑁) = ∅

21.21.3  Topology

Theorem

iunctb2 37861

Using the axiom of countable choice ax-cc 10389, the countable union of countable sets is countable. See iunctb 10529 for a somewhat more general theorem. (Contributed by ML, 10-Dec-2020.)

⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ ω 𝐵 ≼ ω → ∪ 𝑥 ∈ ω 𝐵 ≼ ω)

Theorem

domalom 37862*

A class which dominates every natural number is not finite. (Contributed by ML, 14-Dec-2020.)

⊢ (∀𝑛 ∈ ω 𝑛 ≼ 𝐴 → ¬ 𝐴 ∈ Fin)

Theorem

isinf2 37863*

The converse of isinf 9205. Any set that is not finite is literally infinite, in the sense that it contains subsets of arbitrarily large finite cardinality. (It cannot be proven that the set has countably infinite subsets unless AC is invoked.) The proof does not require the Axiom of Infinity. (Contributed by ML, 14-Dec-2020.)

⊢ (∀𝑛 ∈ ω ∃𝑥(𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑥 ≈ 𝑛) → ¬ 𝐴 ∈ Fin)

Theorem

ctbssinf 37864*

Using the axiom of choice, any infinite class has a countable subset. (Contributed by ML, 14-Dec-2020.)

⊢ (¬ 𝐴 ∈ Fin → ∃𝑥(𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑥 ≈ ω))

Theorem

ralssiun 37865*

The index set of an indexed union is a subset of the union when each 𝐵 contains its index. (Contributed by ML, 16-Dec-2020.)

⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ⊆ ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵)

Theorem

nlpineqsn 37866*

For every point 𝑝 of a subset 𝐴 of 𝑋 with no limit points, there exists an open set 𝑛 that intersects 𝐴 only at 𝑝. (Contributed by ML, 23-Mar-2021.)

⊢ 𝑋 = ∪ 𝐽    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐽 ∈ Top ∧ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝑋 ∧ ((limPt‘𝐽)‘𝐴) = ∅) → ∀𝑝 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑛 ∈ 𝐽 (𝑝 ∈ 𝑛 ∧ (𝑛 ∩ 𝐴) = {𝑝}))

Theorem

nlpfvineqsn 37867*

Given a subset 𝐴 of 𝑋 with no limit points, there exists a function from each point 𝑝 of 𝐴 to an open set intersecting 𝐴 only at 𝑝. This proof uses the axiom of choice. (Contributed by ML, 23-Mar-2021.)

⊢ 𝑋 = ∪ 𝐽    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ((𝐽 ∈ Top ∧ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝑋 ∧ ((limPt‘𝐽)‘𝐴) = ∅) → ∃𝑓(𝑓:𝐴⟶𝐽 ∧ ∀𝑝 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑓‘𝑝) ∩ 𝐴) = {𝑝})))

Theorem

fvineqsnf1 37868*

A theorem about functions where the image of every point intersects the domain only at that point. If 𝐽 is a topology and 𝐴 is a set with no limit points, then there exists an 𝐹 such that this antecedent is true. See nlpfvineqsn 37867 for a proof of this fact. (Contributed by ML, 23-Mar-2021.)

⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐽 ∧ ∀𝑝 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝐹‘𝑝) ∩ 𝐴) = {𝑝}) → 𝐹:𝐴–1-1→𝐽)

Theorem

fvineqsneu 37869*

A theorem about functions where the image of every point intersects the domain only at that point. (Contributed by ML, 27-Mar-2021.)

⊢ ((𝐹 Fn 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑝 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝐹‘𝑝) ∩ 𝐴) = {𝑝}) → ∀𝑞 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑥 ∈ ran 𝐹 𝑞 ∈ 𝑥)

Theorem

fvineqsneq 37870*

A theorem about functions where the image of every point intersects the domain only at that point. (Contributed by ML, 28-Mar-2021.)

⊢ (((𝐹 Fn 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑝 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝐹‘𝑝) ∩ 𝐴) = {𝑝}) ∧ (𝑍 ⊆ ran 𝐹 ∧ 𝐴 ⊆ ∪ 𝑍)) → 𝑍 = ran 𝐹)

21.21.3.1  Pi-base theorems

This section contains a few proofs of theorems found in the pi-base database. The pi-base site can be found at https://topology.pi-base.org.

Definitions of topological properties are theorems labeled pibpN, where N is the property number in pi-base. For example, pibp19 37872 defines countably compact topologies. Proofs of theorems are similarly labeled pibtN, for example pibt2 37875.

Theorem

pibp16 37871*

Property P000016 of pi-base. The class of compact topologies. A space 𝑋 is compact if every open cover of 𝑋 has a finite subcover. This theorem is just a relabeled copy of iscmp 23428. (Contributed by ML, 8-Dec-2020.)

⊢ 𝑋 = ∪ 𝐽    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐽 ∈ Comp ↔ (𝐽 ∈ Top ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 𝐽(𝑋 = ∪ 𝑦 → ∃𝑧 ∈ (𝒫 𝑦 ∩ Fin)𝑋 = ∪ 𝑧)))

Theorem

pibp19 37872*

Property P000019 of pi-base. The class of countably compact topologies. A space 𝑋 is countably compact if every countable open cover of 𝑋 has a finite subcover. (Contributed by ML, 8-Dec-2020.)

⊢ 𝑋 = ∪ 𝐽    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝑥 ∈ Top ∣ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 𝑥((∪ 𝑥 = ∪ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ≼ ω) → ∃𝑧 ∈ (𝒫 𝑦 ∩ Fin)∪ 𝑥 = ∪ 𝑧)}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐽 ∈ 𝐶 ↔ (𝐽 ∈ Top ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 𝐽((𝑋 = ∪ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ≼ ω) → ∃𝑧 ∈ (𝒫 𝑦 ∩ Fin)𝑋 = ∪ 𝑧)))

Theorem

pibp21 37873*

Property P000021 of pi-base. The class of weakly countably compact topologies, or limit point compact topologies. A space 𝑋 is weakly countably compact if every infinite subset of 𝑋 has a limit point. (Contributed by ML, 9-Dec-2020.)

⊢ 𝑋 = ∪ 𝐽    &   ⊢ 𝑊 = {𝑥 ∈ Top ∣ ∀𝑦 ∈ (𝒫 ∪ 𝑥 ∖ Fin)∃𝑧 ∈ ∪ 𝑥𝑧 ∈ ((limPt‘𝑥)‘𝑦)}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐽 ∈ 𝑊 ↔ (𝐽 ∈ Top ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ (𝒫 𝑋 ∖ Fin)∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑋 𝑧 ∈ ((limPt‘𝐽)‘𝑦)))

Theorem

pibt1 37874*

Theorem T000001 of pi-base. A compact topology is also countably compact. See pibp16 37871 and pibp19 37872 for the definitions of the relevant properties. (Contributed by ML, 8-Dec-2020.)

⊢ 𝐶 = {𝑥 ∈ Top ∣ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 𝑥((∪ 𝑥 = ∪ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ≼ ω) → ∃𝑧 ∈ (𝒫 𝑦 ∩ Fin)∪ 𝑥 = ∪ 𝑧)}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐽 ∈ Comp → 𝐽 ∈ 𝐶)

Theorem

pibt2 37875*

Theorem T000002 of pi-base, a countably compact topology is also weakly countably compact. See pibp19 37872 and pibp21 37873 for the definitions of the relevant properties. This proof uses the axiom of choice. (Contributed by ML, 30-Mar-2021.)

⊢ 𝑋 = ∪ 𝐽    &   ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝑥 ∈ Top ∣ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 𝑥((∪ 𝑥 = ∪ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ≼ ω) → ∃𝑧 ∈ (𝒫 𝑦 ∩ Fin)∪ 𝑥 = ∪ 𝑧)}    &   ⊢ 𝑊 = {𝑥 ∈ Top ∣ ∀𝑦 ∈ (𝒫 ∪ 𝑥 ∖ Fin)∃𝑧 ∈ ∪ 𝑥𝑧 ∈ ((limPt‘𝑥)‘𝑦)}    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐽 ∈ 𝐶 → 𝐽 ∈ 𝑊)

21.22  Mathbox for Wolf Lammen

Theorem

wl-section-prop 37876

Intuitionistic logic is now developed separately, so we need not first focus on intuitionally valid axioms ax-1 6 and ax-2 7 any longer.

Alternatively, I start from Jan Lukasiewicz's axiom system here, i.e., ax-mp 5, ax-luk1 37877, ax-luk2 37878 and ax-luk3 37879. I rather copy this system than use luk-1 1674 to luk-3 1676, since the latter are theorems, while we need axioms here.

(Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Feb-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑

Axiom

ax-luk1 37877

1 of 3 axioms for propositional calculus due to Lukasiewicz. Copy of luk-1 1674 and imim1 83, but introduced as an axiom. It focuses on a basic property of a valid implication, namely that the consequent has to be true whenever the antecedent is. So if 𝜑 and 𝜓 are somehow parametrized expressions, then 𝜑 → 𝜓 states that 𝜑 strengthen 𝜓, in that 𝜑 holds only for a (often proper) subset of those parameters making 𝜓 true. We easily accept, that when 𝜓 is stronger than 𝜒 and, at the same time 𝜑 is stronger than 𝜓, then 𝜑 must be stronger than 𝜒. This transitivity is expressed in this axiom.

A particular result of this strengthening property comes into play if the antecedent holds unconditionally. Then the consequent must hold unconditionally as well. This specialization is the foundational idea behind logical conclusion. Such conclusion is best expressed in so-called immediate versions of this axiom like imim1i 63 or syl 17. Note that these forms are weaker replacements (i.e. just frequent specialization) of the closed form presented here, hence a mere convenience.

We can identify in this axiom up to three antecedents, followed by a consequent. The number of antecedents is not really fixed; the fewer we are willing to "see", the more complex the consequent grows. On the other side, since 𝜒 is a variable capable of assuming an implication itself, we might find even more antecedents after some substitution of 𝜒. This shows that the ideas of antecedent and consequent in expressions like this depends on, and can adapt to, our current interpretation of the whole expression.

In this axiom, up to two antecedents happen to be of complex nature themselves, i.e. are an embedded implication. Logically, this axiom is a compact notion of simpler expressions, which I will later coin implication chains. Herein all antecedents and the consequent appear as simple variables, or their negation. Any propositional expression is equivalent to a set of such chains. This axiom, for example, is dissected into following chains, from which it can be recovered losslessly:

(𝜓 → (𝜒 → (𝜑 → 𝜒))); (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜒 → (𝜑 → 𝜒))); (𝜓 → (¬ 𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒))); (¬ 𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒))). (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.)

⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → (𝜑 → 𝜒)))

Axiom

ax-luk2 37878

2 of 3 axioms for propositional calculus due to Lukasiewicz. Copy of luk-2 1675 or pm2.18 128, but introduced as an axiom. The core idea behind this axiom is, that if something can be implied from both an antecedent, and separately from its negation, then the antecedent is irrelevant to the consequent, and can safely be dropped. This is perhaps better seen from the following slightly extended version (related to pm2.65 194):

((𝜑 → 𝜑) → ((¬ 𝜑 → 𝜑) → 𝜑)). (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.)

⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → 𝜑) → 𝜑)

Axiom

ax-luk3 37879

3 of 3 axioms for propositional calculus due to Lukasiewicz. Copy of luk-3 1676 and pm2.24 124, but introduced as an axiom. One might think that the similar pm2.21 123 (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) is a valid replacement for this axiom. But this is not true, ax-3 8 is not derivable from this modification. This can be shown by designing carefully operators ¬ and → on a finite set of primitive statements. In propositional logic such statements are ⊤ and ⊥, but we can assume more and other primitives in our universe of statements. So we denote our primitive statements as phi0 , phi1 and phi2. The actual meaning of the statements are not important in this context, it rather counts how they behave under our operations ¬ and →, and which of them we assume to hold unconditionally (phi1, phi2). For our disproving model, I give that information in tabular form below. The interested reader may check by hand, that all possible interpretations of ax-mp 5, ax-luk1 37877, ax-luk2 37878 and pm2.21 123 result in phi1 or phi2, meaning they always hold. But for wl-luk-ax3 37891 we can find a counter example resulting in phi0, not a statement always true. The verification of a particular set of axioms in a given model is tedious and error prone, so I wrote a computer program, first checking this for me, and second, hunting for a counter example. Here is the result, after 9165 fruitlessly computer generated models:

ax-3 fails for phi2, phi2
number of statements: 3
always true phi1 phi2

Negation is defined as
----------------------------------------------------------------------

-. phi0	-. phi1	-. phi2
phi1	phi0	phi1

Implication is defined as
----------------------------------------------------------------------

p->q	q: phi0	q: phi1	q: phi2
p: phi0	phi1	phi1	phi1
p: phi1	phi0	phi1	phi1
p: phi2	phi0	phi0	phi0

(Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓))

21.22.1  1. Bootstrapping

Theorem

wl-section-boot 37880

In this section, I provide the first steps needed for convenient proving. The presented theorems follow no common concept other than being useful in themselves, and apt to rederive ax-1 6, ax-2 7 and ax-3 8. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑

Theorem

wl-luk-imim1i 37881

Inference adding common consequents in an implication, thereby interchanging the original antecedent and consequent. Copy of imim1i 63 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.)

⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → (𝜑 → 𝜒))

Theorem

wl-luk-syl 37882

An inference version of the transitive laws for implication luk-1 1674. Copy of syl 17 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)

Theorem

wl-luk-imtrid 37883

A syllogism rule of inference. The first premise is used to replace the second antecedent of the second premise. Copy of syl5 34 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 → 𝜃))

Theorem

wl-luk-pm2.18d 37884

Deduction based on reductio ad absurdum. Copy of pm2.18d 127 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)

Theorem

wl-luk-con4i 37885

Inference rule. Copy of con4i 114 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜑)

Theorem

wl-luk-pm2.24i 37886

Inference rule. Copy of pm2.24i 150 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓)

Theorem

wl-luk-a1i 37887

Inference rule. Copy of a1i 11 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜑)

Theorem

wl-luk-mpi 37888

A nested modus ponens inference. Copy of mpi 20 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ 𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)

Theorem

wl-luk-imim2i 37889

Inference adding common antecedents in an implication. Copy of imim2i 16 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜒 → 𝜑) → (𝜒 → 𝜓))

Theorem

wl-luk-imtrdi 37890

A syllogism rule of inference. The second premise is used to replace the consequent of the first premise. Copy of syl6 35 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜃))

Theorem

wl-luk-ax3 37891

ax-3 8 proved from Lukasiewicz's axioms. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) → (𝜓 → 𝜑))

Theorem

wl-luk-ax1 37892

ax-1 6 proved from Lukasiewicz's axioms. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜑))

Theorem

wl-luk-pm2.27 37893

This theorem, called "Assertion", can be thought of as closed form of modus ponens ax-mp 5. Theorem *2.27 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 104. Copy of pm2.27 42 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓))

Theorem

wl-luk-com12 37894

Inference that swaps (commutes) antecedents in an implication. Copy of com12 32 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒))

Theorem

wl-luk-pm2.21 37895

From a wff and its negation, anything follows. Theorem *2.21 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 104. Also called the Duns Scotus law. Copy of pm2.21 123 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))

Theorem

wl-luk-con1i 37896

A contraposition inference. Copy of con1i 147 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜑)

Theorem

wl-luk-ja 37897

Inference joining the antecedents of two premises. Copy of ja 187 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜒)

Theorem

wl-luk-imim2 37898

A closed form of syllogism (see syl 17). Theorem *2.05 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 100. Copy of imim2 58 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜒 → 𝜑) → (𝜒 → 𝜓)))

Theorem

wl-luk-a1d 37899

Deduction introducing an embedded antecedent. Copy of imim2 58 with a different proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓))

Theorem

wl-luk-ax2 37900

ax-2 7 proved from Lukasiewicz's axioms. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Dec-2018.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)

⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜒)))