P. 379 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 37801-37900   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	bj-cbv1hv 37801*	Version of cbv1h 2434 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	bj-cbv2hv 37802*	Version of cbv2h 2435 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑦𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → ∀𝑥𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	bj-cbv2v 37803*	Version of cbv2 2432 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	bj-cbvaldv 37804*	Version of cbvald 2436 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	bj-cbvexdv 37805*	Version of cbvexd 2437 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	bj-cbval2vv 37806*	Version of cbval2vv 2442 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧∀𝑤𝜓)
Theorem	bj-cbvex2vv 37807*	Version of cbvex2vv 2443 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜓)
Theorem	bj-cbvaldvav 37808*	Version of cbvaldva 2438 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	bj-cbvexdvav 37809*	Version of cbvexdva 2439 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜒))
Theorem	bj-cbvex4vv 37810*	Version of cbvex4v 2444 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑣 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑢) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ ((𝑧 = 𝑓 ∧ 𝑤 = 𝑔) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧∃𝑤𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑣∃𝑢∃𝑓∃𝑔𝜒)
Theorem	bj-equsalhv 37811*	Version of equsalh 2449 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. Remark: this is the same as equsalhw 2324. TODO: delete after moving the following paragraph somewhere. Remarks: equsexvw 2037 has been moved to Main; Theorem ax13lem2 2405 has a DV version which is a simple consequence of ax5e 1944; Theorems nfeqf2 2406, dveeq2 2407, nfeqf1 2408, dveeq1 2409, nfeqf 2410, axc9 2411, ax13 2404, have dv versions which are simple consequences of ax-5 1942. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-axc11nv 37812*	Version of axc11n 2455 with a disjoint variable condition; instance of aevlem 2089. TODO: delete after checking surrounding theorems. (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥)
Theorem	bj-aecomsv 37813*	Version of aecoms 2457 with a disjoint variable condition, provable from Tarski's FOL. The corresponding version of naecoms 2458 should not be very useful since ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦, DV (𝑥, 𝑦) is true when the universe has at least two objects (see dtru 5404). (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-axc11v 37814*	Version of axc11 2459 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401 nor ax-10 2177. Remark: the following theorems (hbae 2460, nfae 2462, hbnae 2461, nfnae 2463, hbnaes 2464) would need to be totally unbundled to be proved without ax-13 2401, hence would be simple consequences of ax-5 1942 or nfv 1946. (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	bj-drnf2v 37815*	Version of drnf2 2473 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-10 2177, ax-11 2193, ax-12 2212, ax-13 2401. Instance of nfbidv 1954. The version of axc15 2451 with a disjoint variable condition is actually ax12v2 2214 (up to adding a superfluous antecedent). (Contributed by BJ, 17-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	bj-equs45fv 37816*	Version of equs45f 2488 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. The version of equs5 2489 with a disjoint variable condition is actually sbalex 2278 (up to adding a superfluous antecedent). (Contributed by BJ, 11-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-hbs1 37817*	Version of hbsb2 2511 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401, and removal of ax-13 2401 from hbs1 2307. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	bj-nfs1v 37818*	Version of nfsb2 2512 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401, and removal of ax-13 2401 from nfs1v 2192. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	bj-hbsb2av 37819*	Version of hbsb2a 2513 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Contributed by BJ, 11-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	bj-hbsb3v 37820*	Version of hbsb3 2516 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401. (Remark: the unbundled version of nfs1 2517 is given by bj-nfs1v 37818.) (Contributed by BJ, 11-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → ∀𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	bj-nfsab1 37821*	Remove dependency on ax-13 2401 from nfsab1 2746. UPDATE / TODO: nfsab1 2746 does not use ax-13 2401 either anymore; bj-nfsab1 37821 is shorter than nfsab1 2746 but uses ax-12 2212. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bj-dtrucor2v 37822*	Version of dtrucor2 5333 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2401 (nor ax-4 1841, ax-5 1942, ax-7 2040, ax-12 2212). (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)
21.20.4.15  Distinct var metavariables The closed formula ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝑥 = 𝑦 approximately means that the var metavariables 𝑥 and 𝑦 represent the same variable vi. In a domain with at most one object, however, this formula is always true, hence the "approximately" in the previous sentence.
Theorem	bj-hbaeb2 37823	Biconditional version of a form of hbae 2460 with commuted quantifiers, not requiring ax-11 2193. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Dec-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑧 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	bj-hbaeb 37824	Biconditional version of hbae 2460. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	bj-hbnaeb 37825	Biconditional version of hbnae 2461 (to replace it?). (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	bj-dvv 37826	A special instance of bj-hbaeb2 37823. A lemma for distinct var metavariables. The right-hand side is a closed formula (a sentence). (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦 𝑥 = 𝑦)
21.20.4.16  Around ~ equsal As a rule of thumb, if a theorem of the form ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) is in the database, and the "more precise" theorems ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃) and ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜒) also hold (see bj-bisym 37553), then they should be added to the database. The present case is similar. Similar additions can be done regarding equsex 2447 (and equsalh 2449 and equsexh 2450). Even if only one of these two theorems holds, it should be added to the database.
Theorem	bj-equsal1t 37827	Duplication of wl-equsal1t 38568, with shorter proof. If one imposes a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑦, then one can use alequexv 2033 and reduce axiom dependencies, and similarly for the following theorems. Note: wl-equsalcom 38569 is also interesting. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	bj-equsal1ti 37828	Inference associated with bj-equsal1t 37827. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-equsal1 37829	One direction of equsal 2446. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) → 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-equsal2 37830	One direction of equsal 2446. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-equsal 37831	Shorter proof of equsal 2446. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.) Proof modification is discouraged to avoid using equsal 2446, but "min */exc equsal" is ok. (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
21.20.4.17  Some Principia Mathematica proofs References are made to the second edition (1927, reprinted 1963) of Principia Mathematica, Vol. 1. Theorems are referred to in the form "PM*xx.xx".
Theorem	stdpc5t 37832	Closed form of stdpc5 2244. (Possible to place it before 19.21t 2242 and use it to prove 19.21t 2242). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-stdpc5 37833	More direct proof of stdpc5 2244. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	2stdpc5 37834	A double stdpc5 2244 (one direction of PM*11.3). See also 2stdpc4 2106 and 19.21vv 45454. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	bj-19.21t0 37835	Proof of 19.21t 2242 from stdpc5t 37832. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)))
Theorem	exlimii 37836	Inference associated with exlimi 2253. Inferring a theorem when it is implied by an antecedent which may be true. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜓
Theorem	ax11-pm 37837	Proof of ax-11 2193 similar to PM's proof of alcom 2195 (PM*11.2). For a proof closer to PM's proof, see ax11-pm2 37841. Axiom ax-11 2193 is used in the proof only through nfa2 2209. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	ax6er 37838	Commuted form of ax6e 2412. (Could be placed right after ax6e 2412). (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.)
⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑥
Theorem	exlimiieq1 37839	Inferring a theorem when it is implied by an equality which may be true. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	exlimiieq2 37840	Inferring a theorem when it is implied by an equality which may be true. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Revised by BJ, 30-Sep-2018.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	ax11-pm2 37841*	Proof of ax-11 2193 from the standard axioms of predicate calculus, similar to PM's proof of alcom 2195 (PM*11.2). This proof requires that 𝑥 and 𝑦 be distinct. Axiom ax-11 2193 is used in the proof only through nfal 2353, nfsb 2552, sbal 2205, sb8 2546. See also ax11-pm 37837. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑)
21.20.4.18  Alternate definition of substitution
Theorem	bj-sbsb 37842	Biconditional showing two possible (dual) definitions of substitution df-sb 2099 not using dummy variables. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2021.)
⊢ (((𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∧ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)) ↔ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∨ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	bj-dfsb2 37843	Alternate (dual) definition of substitution df-sb 2099 not using dummy variables. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Mar-2021.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ∨ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)))
21.20.4.19  Lemmas for substitution
Theorem	bj-sbf3 37844	Substitution has no effect on a bound variable (existential quantifier case); see sbf2 2305. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	bj-sbf4 37845	Substitution has no effect on a bound variable (nonfreeness case); see sbf2 2305. (Contributed by BJ, 2-May-2019.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑)
21.20.4.20  Existential uniqueness
Theorem	bj-eu3f 37846*	Version of eu3v 2595 where the disjoint variable condition is replaced with a nonfreeness hypothesis. This is a "backup" of a theorem that used to be in the main part with label "eu3" and was deprecated in favor of eu3v 2595. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jul-1994.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
21.20.4.21  First-order logic: miscellaneous Miscellaneous theorems of first-order logic.
Theorem	bj-sblem1 37847*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-sblem2 37848*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓)) → ((∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜒) → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	bj-sblem 37849*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) → (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bj-sbievw1 37850*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-sbievw2 37851*	Lemma for substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜓 → 𝜑) → (𝜓 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	bj-sbievw 37852*	Lemma for substitution. Closed form of equsalvw 2036 and sbievw 2130. (Contributed by BJ, 23-Jul-2023.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-sbievv 37853	Version of sbie 2531 with a second nonfreeness hypothesis and shorter proof. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Jul-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-moeub 37854	Uniqueness is equivalent to existence being equivalent to unique existence. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥𝜑))
Theorem	bj-sbidmOLD 37855	Obsolete proof of sbidm 2539 temporarily kept here to check it gives no additional insight. (Contributed by NM, 8-Mar-1995.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	bj-dvelimdv 37856*	Deduction form of dvelim 2480 with disjoint variable conditions. Uncurried (imported) form of bj-dvelimdv1 37857. Typically, 𝑧 is a fresh variable used for the implicit substitution hypothesis that results in 𝜒 (namely, 𝜓 can be thought as 𝜓(𝑥, 𝑦) and 𝜒 as 𝜓(𝑥, 𝑧)). So the theorem says that if x is effectively free in 𝜓(𝑥, 𝑧), then if x and y are not the same variable, then 𝑥 is also effectively free in 𝜓(𝑥, 𝑦), in a context 𝜑. One can weaken the implicit substitution hypothesis by adding the antecedent 𝜑 but this typically does not make the theorem much more useful. Similarly, one could use nonfreeness hypotheses instead of disjoint variable conditions but since this result is typically used when 𝑧 is a dummy variable, this would not be of much benefit. One could also remove DV (𝑥, 𝑧) since in the proof nfv 1946 can be replaced with nfal 2353 followed by nfn 1889. Remark: nfald 2358 uses ax-11 2193; it might be possible to inline and use ax11w 2166 instead, but there is still a use via 19.12 2357 anyway. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)
Theorem	bj-dvelimdv1 37857*	Curried (exported) form of bj-dvelimdv 37856 (of course, one is directly provable from the other, but we keep this proof for illustration purposes). (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	bj-dvelimv 37858*	A version of dvelim 2480 using the "nonfree" idiom. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑))    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	bj-nfeel2 37859*	Nonfreeness in a membership statement. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 ∈ 𝑧)
Theorem	bj-axc14nf 37860	Proof of a version of axc14 2492 using the "nonfree" idiom. (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑥 → (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	bj-axc14 37861	Alternate proof of axc14 2492 (even when inlining the above results, this gives a shorter proof). (Contributed by BJ, 20-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑥 → (¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦)))
Theorem	mobidvALT 37862*	Alternate proof of mobidv 2574 directly from its analogues albidv 1952 and exbidv 1953, using deduction style. Note the proof structure, similar to mobi 2572. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 7-Oct-2016.) Reduce axiom dependencies and shorten proof. Remove dependency on ax-12 2212 by adapting proof of mobid 2575. (Revised by BJ, 26-Sep-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃*𝑥𝜒))
Theorem	sbn1ALT 37863	Alternate proof of sbn1 2143, not using the false constant. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Sep-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑡 / 𝑥] ¬ 𝜑 → ¬ [𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜑)
21.20.5  Set theory
21.20.5.1  Eliminability of class terms In this section, we give a sketch of the proof of the Eliminability Theorem for class terms in an extensional set theory where quantification occurs only over set variables. Eliminability of class variables using the $a-statements ax-ext 2732, df-clab 2739, df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835 is an easy result, proved for instance in Appendix X of Azriel Levy, Basic Set Theory, Dover Publications, 2002. Viewed from the set.mm axiomatization, it is a metatheorem not formalizable in set.mm. It states: every formula in the language of FOL + ∈ + class terms, but without class variables, is provably equivalent (over {FOL, ax-ext 2732, df-clab 2739, df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835 }) to a formula in the language of FOL + ∈ (that is, without class terms). The proof goes by induction on the complexity of the formula (see op. cit. for details). The base case is that of atomic formulas. The atomic formulas containing class terms are of one of the six following forms: for equality, 𝑥 = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑}, {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = 𝑦, {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}, and for membership, 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}, {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ 𝑦, {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}. These cases are dealt with by eliminable-veqab 37871, eliminable-abeqv 37872, eliminable-abeqab 37873, eliminable-velab 37870, eliminable-abelv 37874, eliminable-abelab 37875 respectively, which are all proved from {FOL, ax-ext 2732, df-clab 2739, df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835 }. (Details on the proof of the above six theorems. To understand how they were systematically proved, look at the theorems "eliminablei" below, which are special instances of df-clab 2739, dfcleq 2753 (proved from {FOL, ax-ext 2732, df-cleq 2752 }), and dfclel 2836 (proved from {FOL, df-clel 2835 }). Indeed, denote by (i) the formula proved by "eliminablei". One sees that the RHS of (1) has no class terms, the RHS's of (2x) have only class terms of the form dealt with by (1), and the RHS's of (3x) have only class terms of the forms dealt with by (1) and (2a). In order to prove eliminable2a 37865, eliminable2b 37866 and eliminable3a 37868, we need to substitute a class variable for a setvar variable. This is possible because setvars are class terms: this is the content of the syntactic theorem cv 1568, which is used in these proofs (this does not appear in the html pages but it is in the set.mm file and you can check it using the Metamath program).) The induction step relies on the fact that any formula is a FOL-combination of atomic formulas, so if one found equivalents for all atomic formulas constituting the formula, then the same FOL-combination of these equivalents will be equivalent to the original formula. One has a slightly more precise result: if the original formula has only class terms appearing in atomic formulas of the form 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}, then df-clab 2739 is sufficient (over FOL) to eliminate class terms, and if the original formula has only class terms appearing in atomic formulas of the form 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} and equalities, then df-clab 2739, ax-ext 2732 and df-cleq 2752 are sufficient (over FOL) to eliminate class terms. To prove that { df-clab 2739, df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835 } provides a definitional extension of {FOL, ax-ext 2732 }, one needs to prove both the above Eliminability Theorem, which compares the expressive powers of the languages with and without class terms, and the Conservativity Theorem, which compares the deductive powers when one adds { df-clab 2739, df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835 }. It states that a formula without class terms is provable in one axiom system if and only if it is provable in the other, and that this remains true when one adds further definitions to {FOL, ax-ext 2732 }. It is also proved in op. cit. The proof is more difficult, since one has to construct for each proof of a statement without class terms, an associated proof not using { df-clab 2739, df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835 }. It involves a careful case study on the structure of the proof tree.
Theorem	eliminable1 37864	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	eliminable2a 37865*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑}))
Theorem	eliminable2b 37866*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	eliminable2c 37867*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝑧 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}))
Theorem	eliminable3a 37868*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑧(𝑧 = {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	eliminable3b 37869*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∃𝑧(𝑧 = {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∧ 𝑧 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}))
Theorem	eliminable-velab 37870	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): variable belongs to abstraction. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	eliminable-veqab 37871*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): variable equals abstraction. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑))
Theorem	eliminable-abeqv 37872*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): abstraction equals variable. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) Beware not to use symmetry of class equality. (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑧([𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	eliminable-abeqab 37873*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): abstraction equals abstraction. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑧([𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜓))
Theorem	eliminable-abelv 37874*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): abstraction belongs to variable. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑧(∀𝑡(𝑡 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ [𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜑) ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))
Theorem	eliminable-abelab 37875*	A theorem used to prove the base case of the Eliminability Theorem (see section comment): abstraction belongs to abstraction. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∃𝑧(∀𝑡(𝑡 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ [𝑡 / 𝑥]𝜑) ∧ [𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜓))
21.20.5.2  Classes without the axiom of extensionality A few results about classes can be proved without using ax-ext 2732. One could move all theorems from cab 2738 to df-clel 2835 (except for dfcleq 2753 and cvjust 2754) in a subsection "Classes" before the subsection on the axiom of extensionality, together with the theorems below. In that subsection, the last statement should be df-cleq 2752. Without ax-ext 2732, the $a-statements df-clab 2739, df-cleq 2752, and df-clel 2835 are no longer eliminable (see previous section) (but PROBABLY df-clab 2739 is still conservative , while df-cleq 2752 and df-clel 2835 are not). This is not a reason not to study what is provable with them but without ax-ext 2732, in order to gauge their strengths more precisely. Before that subsection, a subsection "The membership predicate" could group the statements with ∈ that are currently in the FOL part (including wcel 2144, wel 2145, ax-8 2146, ax-9 2154). Remark: the weakening of eleq1 2848 / eleq2 2849 to eleq1w 2843 / eleq2w 2844 can also be done with eleq1i 2851, eqeltri 2856, eqeltrri 2857, eleq1a 2855, eleq1d 2845, eqeltrd 2860, eqeltrrd 2861, eqneltrd 2880, eqneltrrd 2881, nelneq 2884. Remark: possibility to remove dependency on ax-10 2177, ax-11 2193, ax-13 2401 from nfcri 2914 and theorems using it if one adds a disjoint variable condition (that theorem is typically used with dummy variables, so the disjoint variable condition addition is not very restrictive), and then shorten nfnfc 2934.
Theorem	bj-denoteslem 37876*	Duplicate of issettru 2838 and bj-issettruALTV 37878. Lemma for bj-denotesALTV 37877. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ ⊤})
Theorem	bj-denotesALTV 37877*	Moved to main as iseqsetv-clel 2839 and kept for the comments. This would be the justification theorem for the definition of the unary predicate "E!" by ⊢ ( E! 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑥𝑥 = 𝐴) which could be interpreted as "𝐴 exists" (as a set) or "𝐴 denotes" (in the sense of free logic). A shorter proof using bitri 278 (to add an intermediate proposition ∃𝑧𝑧 = 𝐴 with a fresh 𝑧), cbvexvw 2069, and eqeq1 2764, requires the core axioms and { ax-9 2154, ax-ext 2732, df-cleq 2752 } whereas this proof requires the core axioms and { ax-8 2146, df-clab 2739, df-clel 2835 }. Theorem bj-issetwt 37880 proves that "existing" is equivalent to being a member of a class abstraction. It also requires, with the present proof, { ax-8 2146, df-clab 2739, df-clel 2835 } (whereas with the shorter proof from cbvexvw 2069 and eqeq1 2764 it would require { ax-8 2146, ax-9 2154, ax-ext 2732, df-clab 2739, df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835 }). That every class is equal to a class abstraction is proved by abid1 2896, which requires { ax-8 2146, ax-9 2154, ax-ext 2732, df-clab 2739, df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835 }. There is no disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑦 but the theorem does not depend on ax-13 2401. Actually, the proof depends only on the logical axioms ax-1 6 through ax-7 2040 and sp 2219. The symbol "E!" was chosen to be reminiscent of the analogous predicate in (inclusive or non-inclusive) free logic, which deals with the possibility of nonexistent objects. This analogy should not be taken too far, since here there are no equality axioms for classes: these are derived from ax-ext 2732 and df-cleq 2752 (e.g., eqid 2760 and eqeq1 2764). In particular, one cannot even prove ⊢ ∃𝑥𝑥 = 𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐴 without ax-ext 2732 and df-cleq 2752. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Apr-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑦 𝑦 = 𝐴)
Theorem	bj-issettruALTV 37878*	Moved to main as issettru 2838 and kept for the comments. Weak version of isset 3464 without ax-ext 2732. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ ⊤})
Theorem	bj-elabtru 37879	This is as close as we can get to proving extensionality for "the" "universal" class without ax-ext 2732. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Apr-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ ⊤} ↔ 𝐴 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ ⊤})
Theorem	bj-issetwt 37880*	Closed form of bj-issetw 37881. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Apr-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → (𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∃𝑦 𝑦 = 𝐴))
Theorem	bj-issetw 37881*	The closest one can get to isset 3464 without using ax-ext 2732. See also vexw 2744. The only disjoint variable condition is between 𝑦 and 𝐴. From there, one can prove isset 3464 using eleq2i 2852 (which requires ax-ext 2732 and df-cleq 2752). (Contributed by BJ, 29-Apr-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∃𝑦 𝑦 = 𝐴)
Theorem	bj-issetiv 37882*	Version of bj-isseti 37883 with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑉. The hypothesis uses 𝑉 instead of V for extra generality. This is indeed more general than isseti 3468 as long as elex 3471 is not available (and the non-dependence of bj-issetiv 37882 on special properties of the universal class V is obvious). Prefer its use over bj-isseti 37883 when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 14-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴
Theorem	bj-isseti 37883*	Version of isseti 3468 with a class variable 𝑉 in the hypothesis instead of V for extra generality. This is indeed more general than isseti 3468 as long as elex 3471 is not available (and the non-dependence of bj-isseti 37883 on special properties of the universal class V is obvious). Use bj-issetiv 37882 instead when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 13-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴
Theorem	bj-ralvw 37884	A weak version of ralv 3476 not using ax-ext 2732 (nor df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835, df-v 3452), and only core FOL axioms. See also bj-rexvw 37885. The analogues for reuv 3478 and rmov 3479 are not proved. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	bj-rexvw 37885	A weak version of rexv 3477 not using ax-ext 2732 (nor df-cleq 2752, df-clel 2835, df-v 3452), and only core FOL axioms. See also bj-ralvw 37884. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓}𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥𝜑)
Theorem	bj-rababw 37886	A weak version of rabab 3480 not using df-clel 2835 nor df-v 3452 (but requiring ax-ext 2732) nor ax-12 2212. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bj-rexcom4bv 37887*	Version of rexcom4b 3481 and bj-rexcom4b 37888 with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑉, hence removing dependency on df-sb 2099 and df-clab 2739 (so that it depends on df-clel 2835 and df-rex 3087 only on top of first-order logic). Prefer its use over bj-rexcom4b 37888 when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). Note the 𝑉 in the hypothesis instead of V. (Contributed by BJ, 14-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝐵) ↔ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-rexcom4b 37888*	Remove from rexcom4b 3481 dependency on ax-ext 2732 and ax-13 2401 (and on df-or 862, df-cleq 2752, df-nfc 2909, df-v 3452). The hypothesis uses 𝑉 instead of V (see bj-isseti 37883 for the motivation). Use bj-rexcom4bv 37887 instead when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝐵) ↔ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-ceqsalt0 37889	The FOL content of ceqsalt 3483. Lemma for bj-ceqsalt 37891 and bj-ceqsaltv 37892. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜃 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ ∃𝑥𝜃) → (∀𝑥(𝜃 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalt1 37890	The FOL content of ceqsalt 3483. Lemma for bj-ceqsalt 37891 and bj-ceqsaltv 37892. TODO: consider removing if it does not add anything to bj-ceqsalt0 37889. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Sep-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜃 → ∃𝑥𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝜒 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ 𝜃) → (∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalt 37891*	Remove from ceqsalt 3483 dependency on ax-ext 2732 (and on df-cleq 2752 and df-v 3452). Note: this is not doable with ceqsralt 3484 (or ceqsralv 3490), which uses eleq1 2848, but the same dependence removal is possible for ceqsalg 3485, ceqsal 3487, ceqsalv 3489, cgsexg 3494, cgsex2g 3495, cgsex4g 3496, ceqsex 3497, ceqsexv 3498, ceqsex2 3500, ceqsex2v 3501, ceqsex3v 3502, ceqsex4v 3503, ceqsex6v 3504, ceqsex8v 3505, gencbvex 3506 (after changing 𝐴 = 𝑦 to 𝑦 = 𝐴), gencbvex2 3507, gencbval 3508, vtoclgft 3515 (it uses Ⅎ, whose justification nfcjust 2908 does not use ax-ext 2732) and several other vtocl* theorems (see for instance bj-vtoclg1f 37923). See also bj-ceqsaltv 37892. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsaltv 37892*	Version of bj-ceqsalt 37891 with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑉, removing dependency on df-sb 2099 and df-clab 2739. Prefer its use over bj-ceqsalt 37891 when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 16-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalg0 37893	The FOL content of ceqsalg 3485. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃𝑥𝜒 → (∀𝑥(𝜒 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalg 37894*	Remove from ceqsalg 3485 dependency on ax-ext 2732 (and on df-cleq 2752 and df-v 3452). See also bj-ceqsalgv 37896. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalgALT 37895*	Alternate proof of bj-ceqsalg 37894. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalgv 37896*	Version of bj-ceqsalg 37894 with a disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑉, removing dependency on df-sb 2099 and df-clab 2739. Prefer its use over bj-ceqsalg 37894 when sufficient (in particular when 𝑉 is substituted for V). (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsalgvALT 37897*	Alternate proof of bj-ceqsalgv 37896. (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	bj-ceqsal 37898*	Remove from ceqsal 3487 dependency on ax-ext 2732 (and on df-cleq 2752, df-v 3452, df-clab 2739, df-sb 2099). (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-ceqsalv 37899*	Remove from ceqsalv 3489 dependency on ax-ext 2732 (and on df-cleq 2752, df-v 3452, df-clab 2739, df-sb 2099). (Contributed by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-spcimdv 37900*	Remove from spcimdv 3547 dependency on ax-9 2154, ax-10 2177, ax-11 2193, ax-13 2401, ax-ext 2732, df-cleq 2752 (and df-nfc 2909, df-v 3452, df-or 862, df-tru 1572, df-nf 1816). For an even more economical version, see bj-spcimdvv 37901. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝐴) → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 → 𝜒))