P. 385 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 38401-38500   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	wl-dfcleq.just 38401*	The hypotheses added to this version of df-cleq 2753 address the following: 1. Equality of classes is an equivalence relation, as expected of equality. 2. Equality of classes obeys the Law of Indiscernibles (Leibniz's Law), and is compatible with class membership. 3. Alpha-renaming is explicitly permitted. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 7-Apr-2026.)
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵) ↔ ∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵))    &   ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐴    &   ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐵 = 𝐶 → 𝐶 = 𝐴))    &   ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶))    &   ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵))
Theorem	wl-df.clel 38402*	Define the membership connective between classes. Theorem 6.3 of [Quine] p. 41, or Proposition 4.6 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 13, which we adopt as a definition. See these references for its metalogical justification. The hypotheses assert that every instance of the conclusion obtained by substituting the class variables with set variables already holds. Thus, this definition extends to class variables a relation already valid for set variables, and is therefore conservative. This only sketches the conservativity arguement; for details see Appendix of [Levy] p. 357. For this reason we regard this statement as a "definition", even though it does not have the usual form of a definition. Under a stricter syntactic criterion, df-clel 2836 would instead be an axiom. See also comments under df-clab 2740, df-cleq 2753, and eqabb 2900. Alternate characterizations of 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 when either 𝐴 or 𝐵 is a set are given by clel2g 3613, clel3g 3615, and clel4g 3617. [Levy] p. 338 refers to this as the "axiom of membership", treating the theory of classes as an extralogical extension to our logic and set theory axioms. Under this definition, class members can only be sets; classes are therefore collections of sets. Although the extensionality expressed in df-cleq 2753 already points in this direction, an unusual interpretation of equality could still permit proper classes as members. Although the class definitions df-clab 2740, df-cleq 2753, and df-clel 2836 are eliminable and conservative, and hence meet the requirements for sound definitions, they are technically axioms in that they do not satisfy the syntactic requirements enforced by the current definition checker. The conservativity proofs require external justification beyond the scope of the checker. For a general discussion of the theory of classes, see mmset.html#class 2836. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 27-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ ∃𝑢(𝑢 = 𝑦 ∧ 𝑢 ∈ 𝑧))    &   ⊢ (𝑡 ∈ 𝑡 ↔ ∃𝑣(𝑣 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ 𝑡))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵))
Theorem	wl-dfclel.basic 38403*	This theorem gives a conservative extension of membership of classes, without hypotheses. Conservativity alone, however, is insufficient, since issues involving alpha-renaming can still arise, see in-ax8 36983. Although unsuitable for general use, it is adequate for the development of theorems unaffected by alpha-renaming, including: 1. Theorems whose hypotheses and conclusion contain no bound variables (see eleq1w 2844). 2. Theorems using the same bound variable throughout (see elex2 2838). 3. Theorems in which distinct bound variables arise only through implicit substitution (see eqabbw 2834). (Contributed by BJ, 27-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵))
Theorem	wl-dfclel.just 38404*	Add a hypothesis to wl-dfclel.basic 38403, that permits alpha-renaming. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 7-Apr-2026.)
⊢ (∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵) ↔ ∃𝑦(𝑦 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵))
Theorem	wl-dfcleq 38405*	The defining characterization of class equality. This version of df-cleq 2753 has no restrictions, unlike the forms on which it is based. It is proved in Tarski's FOL from the axiom of extensionality (ax-ext 2733), the definition of class equality (df-cleq 2753), and the definition of class membership (df-clel 2836). Its forward implication is known as "class extensionality". (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 24-Jun-2019.) Base on wl-dfcleq.just 38401. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 7-Apr-2026.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 ↔ ∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵))
Theorem	wl-dfclel 38406*	The defining characterization of class membership. Unlike the forms on which it is based, it is unrestricted. Proven in Tarski's FOL, from the axiom of (set) extensionality (ax-ext 2733), the definitions df-clel 2836 and df-cleq . (Contributed by BJ, 27-Jun-2019.) Base on wl-dfclel.just 38404. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 13-Apr-2026.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵))
21.22.7  Other stuff
Theorem	wl-mps 38407	Replacing a nested consequent. A sort of modus ponens in antecedent position. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜒) → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜃)
Theorem	wl-syls1 38408	Replacing a nested consequent. A sort of syllogism in antecedent position. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜒) → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜃)
Theorem	wl-syls2 38409	Replacing a nested antecedent. A sort of syllogism in antecedent position. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜒) → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → 𝜃)
Theorem	wl-embant 38410	A true wff can always be added as a nested antecedent to an antecedent. Note: this theorem is intuitionistically valid. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Oct-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜒)
Theorem	wl-orel12 38411	In a conjunctive normal form a pair of nodes like (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) eliminates the need of a node (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒). This theorem allows simplifications in that respect. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 20-Jun-2020.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜒)) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))
Theorem	wl-cases2-dnf 38412	A particular instance of orddi 1027 and anddi 1028 converting between disjunctive and conjunctive normal forms, when both 𝜑 and ¬ 𝜑 appear. This theorem in fact rephrases cases2 1063, and is related to consensus 1068. I restate it here in DNF and CNF. The proof deliberately does not use df-ifp 1079 and dfifp4 1082, by which it can be shortened. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jun-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∨ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ ((¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜒)))
Theorem	wl-cbvmotv 38413*	Change bound variable. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. Part of Lemma 7 of [KalishMontague] p. 86. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥⊤ → ∃*𝑦⊤)
Theorem	wl-moteq 38414	Change bound variable. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. Part of Lemma 7 of [KalishMontague] p. 86. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥⊤ → 𝑦 = 𝑧)
Theorem	wl-motae 38415	Change bound variable. Uses only Tarski's FOL axiom schemes. Part of Lemma 7 of [KalishMontague] p. 86. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃*𝑢⊤ → ∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧)
Theorem	wl-moae 38416*	Two ways to express "at most one thing exists" or, in this context equivalently, "exactly one thing exists" . The equivalence results from the presence of ax-6 2000 in the proof, that ensures "at least one thing exists". For other equivalences see wl-euae 38417 and exists1 2686. Gerard Lang pointed out, that ∃𝑦∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 with disjoint 𝑥 and 𝑦 (dfmo 2566, trut 1576) also means "exactly one thing exists" . (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-2004.) State the theorem using truth constant ⊤. (Revised by BJ, 7-Oct-2022.) Reduce axiom dependencies, and use ∃*. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 7-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃*𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-euae 38417*	Two ways to express "exactly one thing exists" . (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (∃!𝑥⊤ ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-nax6im 38418*	The following series of theorems are centered around the empty domain, where no set exists. As a consequence, a set variable like 𝑥 has no instance to assign to. An expression like 𝑥 = 𝑦 is not really meaningful then. What does it evaluate to, true or false? In fact, the grammar extension weq 1995 requires us to formally assign a boolean value to an equation, say always false, unless you want to give up on exmid 908, for example. Whatever it is, we start out with the contraposition of ax-6 2000, that guarantees the existence of at least one set. Our hypothesis here expresses tentatively it might not hold. We can simplify the antecedent then, to the point where we do not need equation any more. This suggests what a decent characterization of the empty domain of discourse could be. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 12-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑥⊤ → 𝜑)
Theorem	wl-hbae1 38419	This specialization of hbae 2461 does not depend on ax-11 2194. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 8-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-naevhba1v 38420*	An instance of hbn1w 2081 applied to equality. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 7-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-spae 38421	Prove an instance of sp 2220 from ax-13 2402 and Tarski's FOL only, without distinct variable conditions. The antecedent ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 holds in a multi-object universe only if 𝑦 is substituted for 𝑥, or vice versa, i.e. both variables are effectively the same. The converse ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 indicates that both variables are distinct, and it so provides a simple translation of a distinct variable condition to a logical term. In case studies ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 and ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 can help eliminating distinct variable conditions. The antecedent ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 is expressed in the theorem's name by the abbreviation ae standing for 'all equal'. Note that we cannot provide a logical predicate telling us directly whether a logical expression contains a particular variable, as such a construct would usually contradict ax-12 2213. Note that this theorem is also provable from ax-12 2213 alone, so you can pick the axiom it is based on. Compare this result to 19.3v 2015 and spaev 2087 having distinct variable conditions, but a smaller footprint on axiom usage. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-speqv 38422*	Under the assumption ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 a specialized version of sp 2220 is provable from Tarski's FOL and ax13v 2403 only. Note that this reverts the implication in ax13lem1 2404, so in fact (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦)) holds. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	wl-19.8eqv 38423*	Under the assumption ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 a specialized version of 19.8a 2218 is provable from Tarski's FOL and ax13v 2403 only. Note that this reverts the implication in ax13lem2 2406, so in fact (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦 ↔ 𝑧 = 𝑦)) holds. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	wl-19.2reqv 38424*	Under the assumption ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 the reverse direction of 19.2 2009 is provable from Tarski's FOL and ax13v 2403 only. Note that in conjunction with 19.2 2009 in fact (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑥𝑧 = 𝑦)) holds. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 17-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦))
Theorem	wl-nfalv 38425*	If 𝑥 is not present in 𝜑, it is not free in ∀𝑦𝜑. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Jan-2020.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑦𝜑
Theorem	wl-nfimf1 38426	An antecedent is irrelevant to a not-free property, if it always holds. I used this variant of nfim 1929 in dvelimdf 2479 to simplify the proof. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 14-Oct-2018.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓))
Theorem	wl-nfae1 38427	Unlike nfae 2463, this specialized theorem avoids ax-11 2194. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jun-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥
Theorem	wl-nfnae1 38428	Unlike nfnae 2464, this specialized theorem avoids ax-11 2194. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥
Theorem	wl-aetr 38429	A transitive law for variable identifying expressions. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 30-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-axc11r 38430	Same as axc11r 2398, but using ax12 2453 instead of ax-12 2213 directly. This better reflects axiom usage in theorems dependent on it. (Contributed by NM, 25-Jul-2015.) Avoid direct use of ax-12 2213. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 30-Mar-2024.)
⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑))
Theorem	wl-dral1d 38431	A version of dral1 2469 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 38444 and nf5di 2319 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 38432	wl-cbvalnae 38433 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 38433	A more general version of cbval 2428 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 2478, nfsb2 2513 or dveeq1 2410. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 4-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜑)    &   ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓)
Theorem	wl-exeq 38434	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 38435	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 38436	Extend nfeqf 2411 to an equivalence. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-nfs1t 38437	If 𝑦 is not free in 𝜑, 𝑥 is not free in [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑. Closed form of nfs1 2518. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-equsalvw 38438*	Version of equsalv 2302 with a disjoint variable condition, and of equsal 2447 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 38439	Deduction version of equsal 2447. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	wl-equsaldv 38440*	Deduction version of equsal 2447. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	wl-equsal 38441	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 38439 first, and then deriving more specialized versions wl-equsal 38441 and wl-equsal1t 38442 then is more efficient than the other way round, which is possible, too. See also equsal 2447. (Revised by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	wl-equsal1t 38442	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 2447, spimt 2416 or sbft 2304, to which it is related. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 19-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → (∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	wl-equsalcom 38443	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 38444	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 38445*	A more general version of sbid2vw 2294. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 14-May-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥][𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	wl-cbvalsbi 38446*	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 2590 with reversed quantifiers not using ax-11 2194. See also the remark in mo4 2592, which lead me to this effort. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 5-Mar-2024.)
⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-sbrimt 38447	Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2338. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜓)))
Theorem	wl-sblimt 38448	Substitution with a variable not free in antecedent affects only the consequent. Closed form of sbrim 2338. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 26-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 → ([𝑦 / 𝑥](𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ([𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	wl-sb9v 38449*	Commutation of quantification and substitution variables based on fewer axioms than sb9 2549. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥[𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-sb8ft 38450*	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8f 2384. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8eft 38451*	Substitution of variable in existentialal quantifier. Closed form of sb8ef 2385. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8t 38452	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8 2547. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8et 38453	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8e 2548. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sbhbt 38454	Closed form of sbhb 2551. 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 38455	Two ways expressing that 𝑥 is effectively not free in 𝜑. Simplified version of sbnf2 2388. Note: This theorem shows that sbnf2 2388 has unnecessary distinct variable constraints. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jul-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)))
Theorem	wl-equsb3 38456	equsb3 2140 with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → ([𝑥 / 𝑦]𝑦 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑧))
Theorem	wl-equsb4 38457	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 38458	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 38459*	Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 38461. (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 38460*	Lemma used to prove wl-sbcom2d 38461. (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 38461	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 38462	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 38463*	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 38462 now. See also sbal1 2558. (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 38464*	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 38462 now. See also sbal2 2559. (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 38465	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 38466*	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 38467	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 38468*	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 38469	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 38470	Version of mof 2589 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 38471	Closed form of mof 2589 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 38472	Version of eu6 2600 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 38473	Closed form of eu6 2600 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 38474	euequ 2623 proved with a distinctor. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∃!𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	wl-mo2t 38475*	Closed form of mof 2589. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-mo3t 38476*	Closed form of mo3 2590. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝜑 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)))
Theorem	wl-nfsbtv 38477*	Closed form of nfsbv 2361. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 2-May-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑧[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-sb8eut 38478	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8eu 2626. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8eutv 38479*	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8euv 2625. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 3-May-2025.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8mot 38480	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8mo 2627. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 11-Aug-2019.)
⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 → (∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑))
Theorem	wl-sb8motv 38481*	Substitution of variable in universal quantifier. Closed form of sb8mo 2627 without ax-13 2402, but requiring 𝑥 and 𝑦 being disjoint. This theorem relates to wl-mo3t 38476, 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 2304 and sbco 2537. So ∃*𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃*𝑦[𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑 is provable from wl-mo3t 38476 in a simple fashion. From an educational standpoint, one would assume wl-mo3t 38476 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 38482	A closed form of issetf 3468. The proof here is a modification of a subproof in vtoclgft 3516, 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 38483	Proving axc11r 2398 from axc11 2460. The hypotheses are two instances of axc11 2460 used in the proof here. Some systems introduce axc11 2460 as an axiom, see for example System S2 in https://us.metamath.org/downloads/finiteaxiom.pdf 2460. By contrast, this database sees the variant axc11r 2398, directly derived from ax-12 2213, as foundational. Later axc11 2460 is proven somewhat trickily, requiring ax-10 2178 and ax-13 2402, 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 38484*	Variant of df-clab 2740, 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 2733, df-clel 2836 and df-cleq 2753. 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 2836. Theorem cleljust 2154 shows that a possible choice does not matter. The original df-clab 2740 can be rederived, see wl-dfclab 38485. 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 38485	Rederive df-clab 2740 from wl-clabv 38484. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 31-May-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑥 / 𝑦]𝜑)
Theorem	wl-clabtv 38486*	Using class abstraction in a context, requiring 𝑥 and 𝜑 disjoint, but based on fewer axioms than wl-clabt 38487. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)})
Theorem	wl-clabt 38487	Using class abstraction in a context. For a version based on fewer axioms see wl-clabtv 38486. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 29-May-2023.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} = {𝑥 ∣ (𝜑 → 𝜓)})
Theorem	wl-eujustlem1 38488*	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))
21.23  Mathbox for Brendan Leahy
Theorem	rabiun 38489*	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 38490*	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 38491	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 38492	Equality theorem for uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → uncurry 𝐴 = uncurry 𝐵)
Theorem	curunc 38493	Currying of uncurrying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 2-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶(𝐶 ↑m 𝐵) ∧ 𝐵 ≠ ∅) → curry uncurry 𝐹 = 𝐹)
Theorem	unccur 38494	Uncurrying of currying. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 5-Jun-2021.)
⊢ ((𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ {∅}) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑊) → uncurry curry 𝐹 = 𝐹)
Theorem	phpreu 38495*	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 38496*	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 38497*	Lemma for fin2so 38498. (Contributed by Brendan Leahy, 29-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝑥 ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥)) → (𝑦𝑅𝑧 → {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑦} [⊊] {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ 𝑤𝑅𝑧}))
Theorem	fin2so 38498	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 38499	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 38500	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)))