P. 38 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 3701-3800   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	moi 3701*	Equality implied by "at most one". (Contributed by NM, 18-Feb-2006.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐵 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ ∃*𝑥𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) → 𝐴 = 𝐵)
Theorem	morex 3702*	Derive membership from uniqueness. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 2-Sep-2009.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐵 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑥𝜑) → (𝜓 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴))
Theorem	euxfr2w 3703*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable 𝑥 to another variable 𝑦 contained in expression 𝐴. Version of euxfr2 3705 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2376. (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2004.) Avoid ax-13 2376. (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ ∃*𝑦 𝑥 = 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	euxfrw 3704*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable 𝑥 to another variable 𝑦 contained in expression 𝐴. Version of euxfr 3706 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2376. (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2004.) Avoid ax-13 2376. (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ ∃!𝑦 𝑥 = 𝐴    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	euxfr2 3705*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable 𝑥 to another variable 𝑦 contained in expression 𝐴. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. Use the weaker euxfr2w 3703 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2004.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ ∃*𝑦 𝑥 = 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥∃𝑦(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜑)
Theorem	euxfr 3706*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable 𝑥 to another variable 𝑦 contained in expression 𝐴. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. Use the weaker euxfrw 3704 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2004.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ ∃!𝑦 𝑥 = 𝐴    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	euind 3707*	Existential uniqueness via an indirect equality. (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2010.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ∧ ∃𝑥𝜑) → ∃!𝑧∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝐴))
Theorem	reu2 3708*	A way to express restricted uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 22-Nov-1994.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	reu6 3709*	A way to express restricted uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 20-Oct-2006.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
Theorem	reu3 3710*	A way to express restricted uniqueness. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	reu6i 3711*	A condition which implies existential uniqueness. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 2-Oct-2015.)
⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝐵)) → ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	eqreu 3712*	A condition which implies existential uniqueness. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 2-Oct-2015.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐵 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝐵)) → ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	rmo4 3713*	Restricted "at most one" using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝑥 = 𝑦))
Theorem	reu4 3714*	Restricted uniqueness using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-1994.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	reu7 3715*	Restricted uniqueness using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜓 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	reu8 3716*	Restricted uniqueness using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜓 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	rmo3f 3717*	Restricted "at most one" using explicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 4-Nov-2012.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 8-Oct-2017.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐴    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦))
Theorem	rmo4f 3718*	Restricted "at most one" using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 24-Oct-2006.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 11-Oct-2016.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 8-Mar-2017.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 8-Oct-2017.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐴    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝑥 = 𝑦))
Theorem	reu2eqd 3719*	Deduce equality from restricted uniqueness, deduction version. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 27-Nov-2019.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐶 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐶)
Theorem	reueq 3720*	Equality has existential uniqueness. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 1-Sep-2015.)
⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = 𝐵)
Theorem	rmoeq 3721*	Equality's restricted existential "at most one" property. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 30-Mar-2018.) (Revised by AV, 27-Oct-2020.) (Proof shortened by NM, 29-Oct-2020.)
⊢ ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝑥 = 𝐴
Theorem	rmoan 3722	Restricted "at most one" still holds when a conjunct is added. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 → ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜓 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	rmoim 3723	Restricted "at most one" is preserved through implication (note wff reversal). (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓 → ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑))
Theorem	rmoimia 3724	Restricted "at most one" is preserved through implication (note wff reversal). (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓 → ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	rmoimi 3725	Restricted "at most one" is preserved through implication (note wff reversal). (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓 → ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	rmoimi2 3726	Restricted "at most one" is preserved through implication (note wff reversal). (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ ∀𝑥((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓 → ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	2reu5a 3727	Double restricted existential uniqueness in terms of restricted existence and restricted "at most one". (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ↔ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑) ∧ ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ∧ ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑)))
Theorem	reuimrmo 3728	Restricted uniqueness implies restricted "at most one" through implication, analogous to euimmo 2615. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 25-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 → 𝜓) → (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓 → ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑))
Theorem	2reuswap 3729*	A condition allowing swap of uniqueness and existential quantifiers. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 7-Apr-2017.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑))
Theorem	2reuswap2 3730*	A condition allowing swap of uniqueness and existential quantifiers. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 7-Apr-2017.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃*𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜑) → (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑))
Theorem	reuxfrd 3731*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable 𝑥 to another variable 𝑦 contained in expression 𝐴. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2012.) Separate variables 𝐵 and 𝐶. (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 8-Oct-2017.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵) → ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝑥 = 𝐴)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 (𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝜓))
Theorem	reuxfr 3732*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable 𝑥 to another variable 𝑦 contained in expression 𝐴. (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2004.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 → ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝑥 = 𝐴)    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 (𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝜑)
Theorem	reuxfr1d 3733*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable 𝑥 to another variable 𝑦 contained in expression 𝐴. Cf. reuxfr1ds 3734. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 7-Apr-2017.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵) → ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝑥 = 𝐴)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 = 𝐴) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝜒))
Theorem	reuxfr1ds 3734*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable 𝑥 to another variable 𝑦 contained in expression 𝐴. Use reuhypd 5389 to eliminate the second hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2012.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵) → ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝑥 = 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓 ↔ ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝜒))
Theorem	reuxfr1 3735*	Transfer existential uniqueness from a variable 𝑥 to another variable 𝑦 contained in expression 𝐴. Use reuhyp 5390 to eliminate the second hypothesis. (Contributed by NM, 14-Nov-2004.)
⊢ (𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 → ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝑥 = 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 𝜓)
Theorem	reuind 3736*	Existential uniqueness via an indirect equality. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-2010.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ ((∀𝑥∀𝑦(((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝜑) ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝜓)) → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ∧ ∃𝑥(𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝜑)) → ∃!𝑧 ∈ 𝐶 ∀𝑥((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝑧 = 𝐴))
Theorem	2rmorex 3737*	Double restricted quantification with "at most one", analogous to 2moex 2639. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	2reu5lem1 3738*	Lemma for 2reu5 3741. Note that ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵𝜑 does not mean "there is exactly one 𝑥 in 𝐴 and exactly one 𝑦 in 𝐵 such that 𝜑 holds"; see comment for 2eu5 2655. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑥∃!𝑦(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	2reu5lem2 3739*	Lemma for 2reu5 3741. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	2reu5lem3 3740*	Lemma for 2reu5 3741. This lemma is interesting in its own right, showing that existential restriction in the last conjunct (the "at most one" part) is optional; compare rmo2 3862. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑) ↔ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑧∃𝑤∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤))))
Theorem	2reu5 3741*	Double restricted existential uniqueness in terms of restricted existential quantification and restricted universal quantification, analogous to 2eu5 2655 and reu3 3710. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 17-Jun-2017.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑) ↔ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑤 ∈ 𝐵 ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤))))
Theorem	2reurmo 3742	Double restricted quantification with restricted existential uniqueness and restricted "at most one", analogous to 2eumo 2641. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 24-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑)
Theorem	2reurex 3743*	Double restricted quantification with existential uniqueness, analogous to 2euex 2640. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 24-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑)
Theorem	2rmoswap 3744*	A condition allowing to swap restricted "at most one" and restricted existential quantifiers, analogous to 2moswap 2643. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 25-Jun-2017.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → (∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 → ∃*𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑))
Theorem	2rexreu 3745*	Double restricted existential uniqueness implies double restricted unique existential quantification, analogous to 2exeu 2645. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 25-Jun-2017.)
⊢ ((∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑 ∧ ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) → ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜑)
2.1.7  Conditional equality (experimental) This is a very useless definition, which "abbreviates" (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) as CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑). What this display hides, though, is that the first expression, even though it has a shorter constant string, is actually much more complicated in its parse tree: it is parsed as (wi (wceq (cv vx) (cv vy)) wph), while the CondEq version is parsed as (wcdeq vx vy wph). It also allows to give a name to the specific ternary operation (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑). This is all used as part of a metatheorem: we want to say that ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑(𝑥) ↔ 𝜑(𝑦))) and ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐴(𝑥) = 𝐴(𝑦)) are provable, for any expressions 𝜑(𝑥) or 𝐴(𝑥) in the language. The proof is by induction, so the base case is each of the primitives, which is why you will see a theorem for each of the set.mm primitive operations. The metatheorem comes with a disjoint variables assumption: every variable in 𝜑(𝑥) is assumed disjoint from 𝑥 except 𝑥 itself. For such a proof by induction, we must consider each of the possible forms of 𝜑(𝑥). If it is a variable other than 𝑥, then we have CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐴 = 𝐴) or CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)), which is provable by cdeqth 3750 and reflexivity. Since we are only working with class and wff expressions, it can't be 𝑥 itself in set.mm, but if it was we'd have to also prove CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 = 𝑦) (where set equality is being used on the right). Otherwise, it is a primitive operation applied to smaller expressions. In these cases, for each setvar variable parameter to the operation, we must consider if it is equal to 𝑥 or not, which yields 2^n proof obligations. Luckily, all primitive operations in set.mm have either zero or one setvar variable, so we only need to prove one statement for the non-set constructors (like implication) and two for the constructors taking a set (the universal quantifier and the class builder). In each of the primitive proofs, we are allowed to assume that 𝑦 is disjoint from 𝜑(𝑥) and vice versa, because this is maintained through the induction. This is how we satisfy the disjoint variable conditions of cdeqab1 3755 and cdeqab 3753.
Syntax	wcdeq 3746	Extend wff notation to include conditional equality. This is a technical device used in the proof that Ⅎ is the not-free predicate, and that definitions are conservative as a result.
wff CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
Definition	df-cdeq 3747	Define conditional equality. All the notation to the left of the ↔ is fake; the parentheses and arrows are all part of the notation, which could equally well be written CondEq𝑥𝑦𝜑. On the right side is the actual implication arrow. The reason for this definition is to "flatten" the structure on the right side (whose tree structure is something like (wi (wceq (cv vx) (cv vy)) wph) ) into just (wcdeq vx vy wph). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))
Theorem	cdeqi 3748	Deduce conditional equality. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
Theorem	cdeqri 3749	Property of conditional equality. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
Theorem	cdeqth 3750	Deduce conditional equality from a theorem. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
Theorem	cdeqnot 3751	Distribute conditional equality over negation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	cdeqal 3752*	Distribute conditional equality over quantification. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧𝜓))
Theorem	cdeqab 3753*	Distribute conditional equality over abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → {𝑧 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑧 ∣ 𝜓})
Theorem	cdeqal1 3754*	Distribute conditional equality over quantification. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓))
Theorem	cdeqab1 3755*	Distribute conditional equality over abstraction. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓})
Theorem	cdeqim 3756	Distribute conditional equality over implication. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ((𝜑 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜃)))
Theorem	cdeqcv 3757	Conditional equality for set-to-class promotion. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	cdeqeq 3758	Distribute conditional equality over equality. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    &   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐶 = 𝐷)    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝐴 = 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 = 𝐷))
Theorem	cdeqel 3759	Distribute conditional equality over elementhood. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.)
⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    &   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐶 = 𝐷)    ⇒   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷))
Theorem	nfcdeq 3760*	If we have a conditional equality proof, where 𝜑 is 𝜑(𝑥) and 𝜓 is 𝜑(𝑦), and 𝜑(𝑥) in fact does not have 𝑥 free in it according to Ⅎ, then 𝜑(𝑥) ↔ 𝜑(𝑦) unconditionally. This proves that Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 is actually a not-free predicate. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	nfccdeq 3761*	Variation of nfcdeq 3760 for classes. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) Avoid ax-11 2157. (Revised by GG, 19-May-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    &   ⊢ CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵
2.1.8  Russell's Paradox
Theorem	rru 3762*	Relative version of Russell's paradox ru 3763 (which corresponds to the case 𝐴 = V). Originally a subproof in pwnss 5322. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 22-Feb-2015.) Avoid df-nel 3037. (Revised by Steven Nguyen, 23-Nov-2022.) Reduce axiom usage. (Revised by GG, 30-Aug-2024.)
⊢ ¬ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥} ∈ 𝐴
Theorem	ru 3763	Russell's Paradox. Proposition 4.14 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 14. In the late 1800s, Frege's Axiom of (unrestricted) Comprehension, expressed in our notation as 𝐴 ∈ V, asserted that any collection of sets 𝐴 is a set i.e. belongs to the universe V of all sets. In particular, by substituting {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} (the "Russell class") for 𝐴, it asserted {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} ∈ V, meaning that the "collection of all sets which are not members of themselves" is a set. However, here we prove {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} ∉ V. This contradiction was discovered by Russell in 1901 (published in 1903), invalidating the Comprehension Axiom and leading to the collapse of Frege's system, which Frege acknowledged in the second edition of his Grundgesetze der Arithmetik. In 1908, Zermelo rectified this fatal flaw by replacing Comprehension with a weaker Subset (or Separation) Axiom ssex 5291 asserting that 𝐴 is a set only when it is smaller than some other set 𝐵. However, Zermelo was then faced with a "chicken and egg" problem of how to show 𝐵 is a set, leading him to introduce the set-building axioms of Null Set 0ex 5277, Pairing prex 5407, Union uniex 7733, Power Set pwex 5350, and Infinity omex 9655 to give him some starting sets to work with (all of which, before Russell's Paradox, were immediate consequences of Frege's Comprehension). In 1922 Fraenkel strengthened the Subset Axiom with our present Replacement Axiom funimaex 6624 (whose modern formalization is due to Skolem, also in 1922). Thus, in a very real sense Russell's Paradox spawned the invention of ZF set theory and completely revised the foundations of mathematics! Another mainstream formalization of set theory, devised by von Neumann, Bernays, and Goedel, uses class variables rather than setvar variables as its primitives. The axiom system NBG in [Mendelson] p. 225 is suitable for a Metamath encoding. NBG is a conservative extension of ZF in that it proves exactly the same theorems as ZF that are expressible in the language of ZF. An advantage of NBG is that it is finitely axiomatizable - the Axiom of Replacement can be broken down into a finite set of formulas that eliminate its wff metavariable. Finite axiomatizability is required by some proof languages (although not by Metamath). There is a stronger version of NBG called Morse-Kelley (axiom system MK in [Mendelson] p. 287). Russell himself continued in a different direction, avoiding the paradox with his "theory of types". Quine extended Russell's ideas to formulate his New Foundations set theory (axiom system NF of [Quine] p. 331). In NF, the collection of all sets is a set, contrarily to ZF and NBG set theories. Russell's paradox has other consequences: when classes are too large (beyond the size of those used in standard mathematics), the axiom of choice ac4 10487 and Cantor's theorem canth 7357 are provably false. (See ncanth 7358 for some intuition behind the latter.) Recent results (as of 2014) seem to show that NF is equiconsistent to Z (ZF in which ax-sep 5266 replaces ax-rep 5249) with ax-sep 5266 restricted to only bounded quantifiers. NF is finitely axiomatizable and can be encoded in Metamath using the axioms from T. Hailperin, "A set of axioms for logic", J. Symb. Logic 9:1-19 (1944). Under our ZF set theory, every set is a member of the Russell class by elirrv 9608 (derived from the Axiom of Regularity), so for us the Russell class equals the universe V (Theorem ruv 9614). See ruALT 9615 for an alternate proof of ru 3763 derived from that fact. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) Remove use of ax-13 2376. (Revised by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) Remove use of ax-10 2141, ax-11 2157, and ax-12 2177. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 20-Jun-2025.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} ∉ V
Theorem	ruOLD 3764	Obsolete version of ru 3763 as of 20-Jun-2025. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) Remove use of ax-13 2376. (Revised by BJ, 12-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} ∉ V
2.1.9  Proper substitution of classes for sets
Syntax	wsbc 3765	Extend wff notation to include the proper substitution of a class for a set. Read this notation as "the proper substitution of class 𝐴 for setvar variable 𝑥 in wff 𝜑".
wff [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑
Definition	df-sbc 3766	Define the proper substitution of a class for a set. When 𝐴 is a proper class, our definition evaluates to false (see sbcex 3775). This is somewhat arbitrary: we could have, instead, chosen the conclusion of sbc6 3796 for our definition, whose right-hand side always evaluates to true for proper classes. Our definition also does not produce the same results as discussed in the proof of Theorem 6.6 of [Quine] p. 42 (although Theorem 6.6 itself does hold, as shown by dfsbcq 3767 below). For example, if 𝐴 is a proper class, Quine's substitution of 𝐴 for 𝑦 in 0 ∈ 𝑦 evaluates to 0 ∈ 𝐴 rather than our falsehood. (This can be seen by substituting 𝐴, 𝑦, and 0 for alpha, beta, and gamma in Subcase 1 of Quine's discussion on p. 42.) Unfortunately, Quine's definition requires a recursive syntactic breakdown of 𝜑, and it does not seem possible to express it with a single closed formula. If we did not want to commit to any specific proper class behavior, we could use this definition only to prove Theorem dfsbcq 3767, which holds for both our definition and Quine's, and from which we can derive a weaker version of df-sbc 3766 in the form of sbc8g 3773. However, the behavior of Quine's definition at proper classes is similarly arbitrary, and for practical reasons (to avoid having to prove sethood of 𝐴 in every use of this definition) we allow direct reference to df-sbc 3766 and assert that [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 is always false when 𝐴 is a proper class. Theorem sbc2or 3774 shows the apparently "strongest" statement we can make regarding behavior at proper classes if we start from dfsbcq 3767. The related definition df-csb 3875 defines proper substitution into a class variable (as opposed to a wff variable). (Contributed by NM, 14-Apr-1995.) (Revised by NM, 25-Dec-2016.)
⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑})
Theorem	dfsbcq 3767	Proper substitution of a class for a set in a wff given equal classes. This is the essence of the sixth axiom of Frege, specifically Proposition 52 of [Frege1879] p. 50. This theorem, which is similar to Theorem 6.7 of [Quine] p. 42 and holds under both our definition and Quine's, provides us with a weak definition of the proper substitution of a class for a set. Since our df-sbc 3766 does not result in the same behavior as Quine's for proper classes, if we wished to avoid conflict with Quine's definition we could start with this theorem and dfsbcq2 3768 instead of df-sbc 3766. (dfsbcq2 3768 is needed because unlike Quine we do not overload the df-sb 2065 syntax.) As a consequence of these theorems, we can derive sbc8g 3773, which is a weaker version of df-sbc 3766 that leaves substitution undefined when 𝐴 is a proper class. However, it is often a nuisance to have to prove the sethood hypothesis of sbc8g 3773, so we will allow direct use of df-sbc 3766 after Theorem sbc2or 3774 below. Proper substitution with a proper class is rarely needed, and when it is, we can simply use the expansion of Quine's definition. (Contributed by NM, 14-Apr-1995.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝐵 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	dfsbcq2 3768	This theorem, which is similar to Theorem 6.7 of [Quine] p. 42 and holds under both our definition and Quine's, relates logic substitution df-sb 2065 and substitution for class variables df-sbc 3766. Unlike Quine, we use a different syntax for each in order to avoid overloading it. See remarks in dfsbcq 3767. (Contributed by NM, 31-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐴 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	sbsbc 3769	Show that df-sb 2065 and df-sbc 3766 are equivalent when the class term 𝐴 in df-sbc 3766 is a setvar variable. This theorem lets us reuse theorems based on df-sb 2065 for proofs involving df-sbc 3766. (Contributed by NM, 31-Dec-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sbceq1d 3770	Equality theorem for class substitution. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) (Revised by NM, 30-Jun-2018.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ [𝐵 / 𝑥]𝜓))
Theorem	sbceq1dd 3771	Equality theorem for class substitution. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.) (Revised by NM, 30-Jun-2018.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → [𝐵 / 𝑥]𝜓)
Theorem	sbceqbid 3772*	Equality theorem for class substitution. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 4-Sep-2018.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ [𝐵 / 𝑥]𝜒))
Theorem	sbc8g 3773	This is the closest we can get to df-sbc 3766 if we start from dfsbcq 3767 (see its comments) and dfsbcq2 3768. (Contributed by NM, 18-Nov-2008.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 29-Jun-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}))
Theorem	sbc2or 3774*	The disjunction of two equivalences for class substitution does not require a class existence hypothesis. This theorem tells us that there are only 2 possibilities for [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 behavior at proper classes, matching the sbc5 3793 (false) and sbc6 3796 (true) conclusions. This is interesting since dfsbcq 3767 and dfsbcq2 3768 (from which it is derived) do not appear to say anything obvious about proper class behavior. Note that this theorem does not tell us that it is always one or the other at proper classes; it could "flip" between false (the first disjunct) and true (the second disjunct) as a function of some other variable 𝑦 that 𝜑 or 𝐴 may contain. (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2004.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) ∨ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑)))
Theorem	sbcex 3775	By our definition of proper substitution, it can only be true if the substituted expression is a set. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 13-Oct-2016.)
⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	sbceq1a 3776	Equality theorem for class substitution. Class version of sbequ12 2251. (Contributed by NM, 26-Sep-2003.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	sbceq2a 3777	Equality theorem for class substitution. Class version of sbequ12r 2252. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2017.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝑥 → ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	spsbc 3778	Specialization: if a formula is true for all sets, it is true for any class which is a set. Similar to Theorem 6.11 of [Quine] p. 44. This is Frege's ninth axiom per Proposition 58 of [Frege1879] p. 51. See also stdpc4 2068 and rspsbc 3854. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2004.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	spsbcd 3779	Specialization: if a formula is true for all sets, it is true for any class which is a set. Similar to Theorem 6.11 of [Quine] p. 44. See also stdpc4 2068 and rspsbc 3854. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜓)
Theorem	sbcth 3780	A substitution into a theorem remains true (when 𝐴 is a set). (Contributed by NM, 5-Nov-2005.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sbcthdv 3781*	Deduction version of sbcth 3780. (Contributed by NM, 30-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜓)
Theorem	sbcid 3782	An identity theorem for substitution. See sbid 2255. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 18-Feb-2017.)
⊢ ([𝑥 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	nfsbc1d 3783	Deduction version of nfsbc1 3784. (Contributed by NM, 23-May-2006.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜓)
Theorem	nfsbc1 3784	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for class substitution. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	nfsbc1v 3785*	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for class substitution. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	nfsbcdw 3786*	Deduction version of nfsbcw 3787. Version of nfsbcd 3789 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2376. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2005.) Avoid ax-13 2376. (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝐴 / 𝑦]𝜓)
Theorem	nfsbcw 3787*	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for class substitution. Version of nfsbc 3790 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2376. (Contributed by NM, 7-Sep-2014.) Avoid ax-13 2376. (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝐴 / 𝑦]𝜑
Theorem	sbccow 3788*	A composition law for class substitution. Version of sbcco 3791 with a disjoint variable condition, which requires fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 26-Sep-2003.) Avoid ax-13 2376. (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑦][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	nfsbcd 3789	Deduction version of nfsbc 3790. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. Use the weaker nfsbcdw 3786 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2005.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝐴 / 𝑦]𝜓)
Theorem	nfsbc 3790	Bound-variable hypothesis builder for class substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. Use the weaker nfsbcw 3787 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 7-Sep-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥[𝐴 / 𝑦]𝜑
Theorem	sbcco 3791*	A composition law for class substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. Use the weaker sbccow 3788 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 26-Sep-2003.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 13-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑦][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sbcco2 3792*	A composition law for class substitution. Importantly, 𝑥 may occur free in the class expression substituted for 𝐴. (Contributed by NM, 5-Sep-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝑥 / 𝑦][𝐵 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	sbc5 3793*	An equivalence for class substitution. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.) (Proof shortened by SN, 2-Sep-2024.)
⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	sbc5ALT 3794*	Alternate proof of sbc5 3793. This proof helps show how clelab 2880 works, since it is equivalent but shorter thanks to now-available library theorems like vtoclbg 3536 and isset 3473. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	sbc6g 3795*	An equivalence for class substitution. (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by SN, 5-Oct-2024.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑)))
Theorem	sbc6 3796*	An equivalence for class substitution. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Eric Schmidt, 17-Jan-2007.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 → 𝜑))
Theorem	sbc7 3797*	An equivalence for class substitution in the spirit of df-clab 2714. Note that 𝑥 and 𝐴 don't have to be distinct. (Contributed by NM, 18-Nov-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 13-Oct-2016.)
⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦(𝑦 = 𝐴 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	cbvsbcw 3798*	Change bound variables in a wff substitution. Version of cbvsbc 3800 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2376. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 19-Sep-2009.) Avoid ax-13 2376. (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑦]𝜓)
Theorem	cbvsbcvw 3799*	Change the bound variable of a class substitution using implicit substitution. Version of cbvsbcv 3801 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2376. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2008.) Avoid ax-13 2376. (Revised by GG, 10-Jan-2024.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑦]𝜓)
Theorem	cbvsbc 3800	Change bound variables in a wff substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. Use the weaker cbvsbcw 3798 when possible. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 19-Sep-2009.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 8-Jun-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑    &   ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑦]𝜓)