| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 384 of 509) | < Previous Next > | |
| Bad symbols? Try the
GIF version. |
||
|
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > MPE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
||
| Color key: | (1-31407) |
(31408-32930) |
(32931-50831) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | wl-axc11r 38301 | Same as axc11r 2399, but using ax12 2454 instead of ax-12 2215 directly. This better reflects axiom usage in theorems dependent on it. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jul-2015.) Avoid direct use of ax-12 2215. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 30-Mar-2024.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-dral1d 38302 | A version of dral1 2470 with a context. Note: At first glance one might be tempted to generalize this (or a similar) theorem by weakening the first two hypotheses adding a 𝑥 = 𝑦, ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 or 𝜑 antecedent. wl-equsal1i 38315 and nf5di 2320 show that this is in fact pointless. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-cbvalnaed 38303 | wl-cbvalnae 38304 with a context. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-cbvalnae 38304 | A more general version of cbval 2429 when nonfree properties depend on a distinctor. Such expressions arise in proofs aiming at the elimination of distinct variable constraints, specifically in application of dvelimf 2479, nfsb2 2514 or dveeq1 2411. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) & ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | wl-exeq 38305 | The semantics of ∃𝑥𝑦 = 𝑧. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (𝑦 = 𝑧 ∨ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-aleq 38306 | The semantics of ∀𝑥𝑦 = 𝑧. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (𝑦 = 𝑧 ∧ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfeqfb 38307 | Extend nfeqf 2412 to an equivalence. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfs1t 38308 | If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. Closed form of nfs1 2519. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsalvw 38309* |
Version of equsalv 2303 with a disjoint variable condition, and of equsal 2448
with two disjoint variable conditions, which requires fewer axioms. See
also the dual form equsexvw 2038.
This theorem lays the foundation to a transformation of expressions called substitution of set variables in a wff. Only in this particular context we additionally assume 𝜑 and 𝑦 disjoint, stated here as 𝜑(𝑥). Similarly the disjointness of 𝜓 and 𝑥 is expressed by 𝜓(𝑦). Both 𝜑 and 𝜓 may still depend on other set variables, but that is irrelevant here. We want to transform 𝜑(𝑥) into 𝜓(𝑦) such that 𝜓 depends on 𝑦 the same way as 𝜑 depends on 𝑥. This dependency is expressed in our hypothesis (called implicit substitution): (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)). For primitive enough 𝜑 a sort of textual substitution of 𝑥 by 𝑦 is sufficient for such transformation. But note: 𝜑 must not contain wff variables, and the substitution is no proper textual substitution either. We still need grammar information to not accidently replace the x in a token 'x.' denoting multiplication, but only catch set variables 𝑥. Our current stage of development allows only equations and quantifiers make up such primitives. Thanks to equequ1 2058 and cbvalvw 2069 we can then prove in a mechanical way that in fact the implicit substitution holds for each instance. If 𝜑 contains wff variables we cannot use textual transformation any longer, since we don't know how to replace 𝑦 for 𝑥 in placeholders of unknown structure. Our theorem now states, that the generic expression ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) formally behaves as if such a substitution was possible and made. (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsald 38310 | Deduction version of equsal 2448. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsaldv 38311* | Deduction version of equsal 2448. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsal 38312 | A useful equivalence related to substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 12-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 3-Oct-2016.) It seems proving wl-equsald 38310 first, and then deriving more specialized versions wl-equsal 38312 and wl-equsal1t 38313 then is more efficient than the other way round, which is possible, too. See also equsal 2448. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsal1t 38313 |
The expression 𝑥 = 𝑦 in antecedent position plays an
important role in
predicate logic, namely in implicit substitution. However, occasionally
it is irrelevant, and can safely be dropped. A sufficient condition for
this is when 𝑥 (or 𝑦 or both) is not free in
𝜑.
This theorem is more fundamental than equsal 2448, spimt 2417 or sbft 2305, to which it is related. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 19-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsalcom 38314 | This simple equivalence eases substitution of one expression for the other. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 1-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsal1i 38315 | The antecedent 𝑥 = 𝑦 is irrelevant, if one or both setvar variables are not free in 𝜑. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 1-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ∨ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbid2ft 38316* | A more general version of sbid2vw 2295. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 14-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-cbvalsbi 38317* | Change bounded variables in a special case. The reverse direction seems to involve ax-11 2194. My hope is that I will in some future be able to prove mo3 2591 with reversed quantifiers not using ax-11 2194. See also the remark in mo4 2593, which lead me to this effort. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2024.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbrimt 38318 | Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2339. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sblimt 38319 | Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2339. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb9v 38320* | Commutation of quantification and substitution variables based on fewer axioms than sb9 2550. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥[𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8ft 38321* | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8f 2385. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8eft 38322* | Substitution of variable in existentialal quantifier. Closed form of sb8ef 2386. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8t 38323 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8 2548. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8et 38324 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8e 2549. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbhbt 38325 | Closed form of sbhb 2552. Characterizing the expression 𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑 using a substitution expression. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → ((𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ↔ ∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbnf1 38326 | Two ways expressing that 𝑥 is effectively not free in 𝜑. Simplified version of sbnf2 2389. Note: This theorem shows that sbnf2 2389 has unnecessary distinct variable constraints. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsb3 38327 | equsb3 2140 with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-equsb4 38328 | Substitution applied to an atomic wff. The distinctor antecedent is more general than a distinct variable condition. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑦 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-2sb6d 38329 | Version of 2sb6 2123 with a context, and distinct variable conditions replaced with distinctors. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑤) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑧 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑦]𝜓 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbcom2d-lem1 38330* | Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 38332. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 10-Aug-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑣 = 𝑤) → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑤 → ([𝑢 / 𝑥][𝑣 / 𝑧]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑧]𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbcom2d-lem2 38331* | Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 38332. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 10-Aug-2019.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → ([𝑢 / 𝑥][𝑣 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑥 = 𝑢 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑣) → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbcom2d 38332 | Version of sbcom2 2209 with a context, and distinct variable conditions replaced with distinctors. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑤) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ([𝑤 / 𝑧][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑧]𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbalnae 38333 | A theorem used in elimination of disjoint variable restrictions by replacing them with distinctors. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧) → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbal1 38334* | A theorem used in elimination of disjoint variable restriction on 𝑥 and 𝑦 by replacing it with a distinctor ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑧. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1993.) Proof is based on wl-sbalnae 38333 now. See also sbal1 2559. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sbal2 38335* | Move quantifier in and out of substitution. Revised to remove a distinct variable constraint. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) Proof is based on wl-sbalnae 38333 now. See also sbal2 2560. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ([𝑧 / 𝑦]∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥[𝑧 / 𝑦]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-2spsbbi 38336 | spsbbi 2110 applied twice. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Aug-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑎∀𝑏(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ([𝑦 / 𝑏][𝑥 / 𝑎]𝜑 ↔ [𝑦 / 𝑏][𝑥 / 𝑎]𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-lem-exsb 38337* | This theorem provides a basic working step in proving theorems about ∃* or ∃!. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-lem-nexmo 38338 | This theorem provides a basic working step in proving theorems about ∃* or ∃!. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-lem-moexsb 38339* |
The antecedent ∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧) relates to ∃*𝑥𝜑, but is
better suited for usage in proofs. Note that no distinct variable
restriction is placed on 𝜑.
This theorem provides a basic working step in proving theorems about ∃* or ∃!. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑧) → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-alanbii 38340 | This theorem extends alanimi 1849 to a biconditional. Recurrent usage stacks up more quantifiers. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ (∀𝑥𝜓 ∧ ∀𝑥𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-mo2df 38341 | Version of mof 2590 with a context and a distinctor replacing a distinct variable condition. This version should be used only to eliminate disjoint variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜓 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-mo2tf 38342 | Closed form of mof 2590 with a distinctor avoiding distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-eudf 38343 | Version of eu6 2601 with a context and a distinctor replacing a distinct variable condition. This version should be used only to eliminate disjoint variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜓 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-eutf 38344 | Closed form of eu6 2601 with a distinctor avoiding distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑) → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-euequf 38345 | euequ 2624 proved with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | wl-mo2t 38346* | Closed form of mof 2590. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-mo3t 38347* | Closed form of mo3 2591. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | wl-nfsbtv 38348* | Closed form of nfsbv 2362. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 2-May-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8eut 38349 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8eu 2627. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8eutv 38350* | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8euv 2626. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-May-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8mot 38351 | Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8mo 2628. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-sb8motv 38352* |
Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of
sb8mo 2628 without ax-13 2403, but requiring 𝑥 and 𝑦 being
disjoint.
This theorem relates to wl-mo3t 38347, since replacing 𝜑 with [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 in the latter yields subexpressions like [𝑥 / 𝑦][𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑, which can be reduced to 𝜑 via sbft 2305 and sbco 2538. So ∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 is provable from wl-mo3t 38347 in a simple fashion. From an educational standpoint, one would assume wl-mo3t 38347 to be more fundamental, as it hints how the "at most one" objects on both sides of the biconditional correlate (they are the same), if they exist at all, and then prove this theorem from it. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-May-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-issetft 38353 | A closed form of issetf 3470. The proof here is a modification of a subproof in vtoclgft 3518, where it could be used to shorten the proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 25-Jan-2025.) |
| ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 → (𝐴 ∈ V ↔ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-axc11rc11 38354 |
Proving axc11r 2399 from axc11 2461. The hypotheses are two instances of
axc11 2461 used in the proof here. Some systems
introduce axc11 2461 as an
axiom, see for example System S2 in
https://us.metamath.org/downloads/finiteaxiom.pdf 2461.
By contrast, this database sees the variant axc11r 2399, directly derived from ax-12 2215, as foundational. Later axc11 2461 is proven somewhat trickily, requiring ax-10 2178 and ax-13 2403, see its proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → ∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑥)) & ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | wl-clabv 38355* |
Variant of df-clab 2741, where the element 𝑥 is required to be
disjoint from the class it is taken from. This restriction meets
similar ones found in other definitions and axioms like ax-ext 2734,
df-clel 2837 and df-cleq 2754. 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 with 𝐴 depending on 𝑥 can
be the source of side effects, that you rather want to be aware of. So
here we eliminate one possible way of letting this slip in instead.
An expression 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 with 𝑥, 𝐴 not disjoint, is now only introduced either via ax-8 2147, ax-9 2155, or df-clel 2837. Theorem cleljust 2154 shows that a possible choice does not matter. The original df-clab 2741 can be rederived, see wl-dfclab 38356. In an implementation this theorem is the only user of df-clab. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) Element and class are disjoint. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 31-May-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-dfclab 38356 | Rederive df-clab 2741 from wl-clabv 38355. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-May-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | wl-clabtv 38357* | Using class abstraction in a context, requiring 𝑥 and 𝜑 disjoint, but based on fewer axioms than wl-clabt 38358. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)}) | ||
| Theorem | wl-clabt 38358 | Using class abstraction in a context. For a version based on fewer axioms see wl-clabtv 38357. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)}) | ||
| Theorem | wl-eujustlem1 38359* | Version of cbvexvw 2070 with references to ax-6 2000 listed as antecedents. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ((∀𝑦∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑥∃𝑦 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | rabiun 38360* | Abstraction restricted to an indexed union. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 26-Oct-2017.) |
| ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ ∪ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∣ 𝜑} = ∪ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 {𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | iundif1 38361* | Indexed union of class difference with the subtrahend held constant. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 6-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐵 ∖ 𝐶) = (∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∖ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | imadifss 38362 | The difference of images is a subset of the image of the difference. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐹 “ 𝐴) ∖ (𝐹 “ 𝐵)) ⊆ (𝐹 “ (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | unceq 38363 | Equality theorem for uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → uncurry 𝐴 = uncurry 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | curunc 38364 | Currying of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) ∧ 𝐵 ≠ ∅) → curry uncurry 𝐹 = 𝐹) | ||
| Theorem | unccur 38365 | Uncurrying of currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 5-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ {∅}) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑊) → uncurry curry 𝐹 = 𝐹) | ||
| Theorem | phpreu 38366* | Theorem related to pigeonhole principle. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ Fin ∧ 𝐴 ≈ 𝐵) → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑥 = 𝐶 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃!𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑥 = 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | finixpnum 38367* | A finite Cartesian product of numerable sets is numerable. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 24-Feb-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ Fin ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ dom card) → X𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ dom card) | ||
| Theorem | fin2solem 38368* | Lemma for fin2so 38369. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 29-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝑥 ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥)) → (𝑦𝑅𝑧 → {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑦} [⊊] {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑧})) | ||
| Theorem | fin2so 38369 | Any totally ordered Tarski-finite set is finite; in particular, no amorphous set can be ordered. Theorem 2 of [Levy58]] p. 4. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 28-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ FinII ∧ 𝑅 Or 𝐴) → 𝐴 ∈ Fin) | ||
| Theorem | ltflcei 38370 | Theorem to move the floor function across a strict inequality. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 25-Oct-2017.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℝ) → ((⌊‘𝐴) < 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 < -(⌊‘-𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | leceifl 38371 | Theorem to move the floor function across a non-strict inequality. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 25-Oct-2017.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℝ) → (-(⌊‘-𝐴) ≤ 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ≤ (⌊‘𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | sin2h 38372 | Half-angle rule for sine. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 3-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (0[,](2 · π)) → (sin‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 − (cos‘𝐴)) / 2))) | ||
| Theorem | cos2h 38373 | Half-angle rule for cosine. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (-π[,]π) → (cos‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 + (cos‘𝐴)) / 2))) | ||
| Theorem | tan2h 38374 | Half-angle rule for tangent. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (0[,)π) → (tan‘(𝐴 / 2)) = (√‘((1 − (cos‘𝐴)) / (1 + (cos‘𝐴))))) | ||
| Theorem | lindsadd 38375 | In a vector space, the union of an independent set and a vector not in its span is an independent set. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 4-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑊 ∈ LVec ∧ 𝐹 ∈ (LIndS‘𝑊) ∧ 𝑋 ∈ ((Base‘𝑊) ∖ ((LSpan‘𝑊)‘𝐹))) → (𝐹 ∪ {𝑋}) ∈ (LIndS‘𝑊)) | ||
| Theorem | ptrest 38376* | Expressing a restriction of a product topology as a product topology. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 24-Mar-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶Top) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑘 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑆 ∈ 𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((∏t‘𝐹) ↾t X𝑘 ∈ 𝐴 𝑆) = (∏t‘(𝑘 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ ((𝐹‘𝑘) ↾t 𝑆)))) | ||
| Theorem | ptrecube 38377* | Any point in an open set of N-space is surrounded by an open cube within that set. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) (Proof shortened by AV, 28-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ 𝑅 = (∏t‘((1...𝑁) × {(topGen‘ran (,))})) & ⊢ 𝐷 = ((abs ∘ − ) ↾ (ℝ × ℝ)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑆 ∈ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑃 ∈ 𝑆) → ∃𝑑 ∈ ℝ+ X𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝑃‘𝑛)(ball‘𝐷)𝑑) ⊆ 𝑆) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem1 38378* | Lemma for poimir 38410- the vertices on either side of a skipped vertex differ in at least two dimensions. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < 𝑀, 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌(𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑁)⟶ℤ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ ∃*𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 1))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘𝑀)‘𝑛)) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem2 38379* | Lemma for poimir 38410- consecutive vertices differ in at most one dimension. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < 𝑀, 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌(𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑁)⟶ℤ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑉 ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ((0...𝑁) ∖ {𝑉})) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑉 − 1))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘𝑉)‘𝑛)) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem3 38380* | Lemma for poimir 38410 to add an interior point to an admissible face on the back face of the cube. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐾 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ℕ0) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 < 𝑁) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑀)⟶(0..^𝐾)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑀)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑀)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋((𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑀)) × {0}))) ∪ (((𝑀 + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵 → (〈(𝑇 ∪ {〈(𝑀 + 1), 0〉}), (𝑈 ∪ {〈(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)〉})〉 ∈ (((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...(𝑀 + 1))) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...(𝑀 + 1))–1-1-onto→(1...(𝑀 + 1))}) ∧ (∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋(((𝑇 ∪ {〈(𝑀 + 1), 0〉}) ∘f + ((((𝑈 ∪ {〈(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)〉}) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((𝑈 ∪ {〈(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)〉}) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...(𝑀 + 1))) × {0}))) ∪ ((((𝑀 + 1) + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵 ∧ ((𝑇 ∪ {〈(𝑀 + 1), 0〉})‘(𝑀 + 1)) = 0 ∧ ((𝑈 ∪ {〈(𝑀 + 1), (𝑀 + 1)〉})‘(𝑀 + 1)) = (𝑀 + 1))))) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem4 38381* | Lemma for poimir 38410 connecting the admissible faces on the back face of the (𝑀 + 1)-cube to admissible simplices in the 𝑀-cube. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐾 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ℕ0) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 < 𝑁) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑠 ∈ (((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑀)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑀)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑀)}) ∣ ∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋(((1st ‘𝑠) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘𝑠) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘𝑠) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑀)) × {0}))) ∪ (((𝑀 + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵} ≈ {𝑠 ∈ (((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...(𝑀 + 1))) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...(𝑀 + 1))–1-1-onto→(1...(𝑀 + 1))}) ∣ (∀𝑖 ∈ (0...𝑀)∃𝑗 ∈ (0...𝑀)𝑖 = ⦋(((1st ‘𝑠) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘𝑠) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘𝑠) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...(𝑀 + 1))) × {0}))) ∪ ((((𝑀 + 1) + 1)...𝑁) × {0})) / 𝑝⦌𝐵 ∧ ((1st ‘𝑠)‘(𝑀 + 1)) = 0 ∧ ((2nd ‘𝑠)‘(𝑀 + 1)) = (𝑀 + 1))}) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem5 38382* | Lemma for poimir 38410 to establish that, for the simplices defined by a walk along the edges of an 𝑁-cube, if the starting vertex is not opposite a given face, it is the earliest vertex of the face on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 0 < (2nd ‘𝑇)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹‘0) = (1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇))) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem6 38383* | Lemma for poimir 38410 establishing, for a face of a simplex defined by a walk along the edges of an 𝑁-cube, the single dimension in which successive vertices before the opposite vertex differ. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (1...((2nd ‘𝑇) − 1))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 1))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘𝑀)‘𝑛)) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑀)) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem7 38384* | Lemma for poimir 38410, similar to poimirlem6 38383, but for vertices after the opposite vertex. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ((((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1) + 1)...𝑁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (℩𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 2))‘𝑛) ≠ ((𝐹‘(𝑀 − 1))‘𝑛)) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑀)) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem8 38385* | Lemma for poimir 38410, establishing that away from the opposite vertex the walks in poimirlem9 38386 yield the same vertices. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)})) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)}))) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem9 38386* | Lemma for poimir 38410, establishing the two walks that yield a given face when the opposite vertex is neither first nor last. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) ≠ (2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ ({〈(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)〉, 〈((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1), (2nd ‘𝑇)〉} ∪ ( I ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)}))))) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem10 38387* | Lemma for poimir 38410 establishing the cube that yields the simplex that yields a face if the opposite vertex was first on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐹‘(𝑁 − 1)) ∘f − ((1...𝑁) × {1})) = (1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇))) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem11 38388* | Lemma for poimir 38410 connecting walks that could yield from a given cube a given face opposite the first vertex of the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑈) = 0) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (1...𝑁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) “ (1...𝑀)) ⊆ ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) “ (1...𝑀))) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem12 38389* | Lemma for poimir 38410 connecting walks that could yield from a given cube a given face opposite the final vertex of the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 𝑁) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑈) = 𝑁) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) “ (1...𝑀)) ⊆ ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑈)) “ (1...𝑀))) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem13 38390* | Lemma for poimir 38410- for at most one simplex associated with a shared face is the opposite vertex first on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 (2nd ‘𝑧) = 0) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem14 38391* | Lemma for poimir 38410- for at most one simplex associated with a shared face is the opposite vertex last on the walk. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃*𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 (2nd ‘𝑧) = 𝑁) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem15 38392* | Lemma for poimir 38410, that the face in poimirlem22 38399 is a face. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) ∈ (1...(𝑁 − 1))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 〈〈(1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇)), ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ ({〈(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)〉, 〈((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1), (2nd ‘𝑇)〉} ∪ ( I ↾ ((1...𝑁) ∖ {(2nd ‘𝑇), ((2nd ‘𝑇) + 1)}))))〉, (2nd ‘𝑇)〉 ∈ 𝑆) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem16 38393* | Lemma for poimir 38410 establishing the vertices of the simplex of poimirlem17 38394. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 𝐾) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ((𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ (((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑛) + if(𝑛 = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘1), 1, 0))) ∘f + (((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ (𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ if(𝑛 = 𝑁, 1, (𝑛 + 1)))) “ (1...𝑦)) × {1}) ∪ ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ (𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ if(𝑛 = 𝑁, 1, (𝑛 + 1)))) “ ((𝑦 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem17 38394* | Lemma for poimir 38410 establishing existence for poimirlem18 38395. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 𝐾) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 𝑧 ≠ 𝑇) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem18 38395* | Lemma for poimir 38410 stating that, given a face not on a front face of the main cube and a simplex in which it's opposite the first vertex on the walk, there exists exactly one other simplex containing it. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 𝐾) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 0) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃!𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 𝑧 ≠ 𝑇) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem19 38396* | Lemma for poimir 38410 establishing the vertices of the simplex in poimirlem20 38397. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 0) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 𝑁) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ((𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ (((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑛) − if(𝑛 = ((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇))‘𝑁), 1, 0))) ∘f + (((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ (𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ if(𝑛 = 1, 𝑁, (𝑛 − 1)))) “ (1...(𝑦 + 1))) × {1}) ∪ ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑇)) ∘ (𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁) ↦ if(𝑛 = 1, 𝑁, (𝑛 − 1)))) “ (((𝑦 + 1) + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem20 38397* | Lemma for poimir 38410 establishing existence for poimirlem21 38398. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 0) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 𝑁) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 𝑧 ≠ 𝑇) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem21 38398* | Lemma for poimir 38410 stating that, given a face not on a back face of the cube and a simplex in which it's opposite the final point of the walk, there exists exactly one other simplex containing it. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 0) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (2nd ‘𝑇) = 𝑁) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃!𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 𝑧 ≠ 𝑇) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem22 38399* | Lemma for poimir 38410, that a given face belongs to exactly two simplices, provided it's not on the boundary of the cube. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ 𝑆 = {𝑡 ∈ ((((0..^𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁)) × {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)}) × (0...𝑁)) ∣ 𝐹 = (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < (2nd ‘𝑡), 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌((1st ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) ∘f + ((((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ (((2nd ‘(1st ‘𝑡)) “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:(0...(𝑁 − 1))⟶((0...𝐾) ↑m (1...𝑁))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 0) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑛 ∈ (1...𝑁)) → ∃𝑝 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑝‘𝑛) ≠ 𝐾) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃!𝑧 ∈ 𝑆 𝑧 ≠ 𝑇) | ||
| Theorem | poimirlem23 38400* | Lemma for poimir 38410, two ways of expressing the property that a face is not on the back face of the cube. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 21-Aug-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℕ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇:(1...𝑁)⟶(0..^𝐾)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈:(1...𝑁)–1-1-onto→(1...𝑁)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑉 ∈ (0...𝑁)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (∃𝑝 ∈ ran (𝑦 ∈ (0...(𝑁 − 1)) ↦ ⦋if(𝑦 < 𝑉, 𝑦, (𝑦 + 1)) / 𝑗⦌(𝑇 ∘f + (((𝑈 “ (1...𝑗)) × {1}) ∪ ((𝑈 “ ((𝑗 + 1)...𝑁)) × {0}))))(𝑝‘𝑁) ≠ 0 ↔ ¬ (𝑉 = 𝑁 ∧ ((𝑇‘𝑁) = 0 ∧ (𝑈‘𝑁) = 𝑁)))) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |