| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 390 of 501) | < 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: | (1-30976) |
(30977-32499) |
(32500-50086) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | dmqseqeq1d 38901 | Equality theorem for domain quotient set, deduction version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 = 𝑆) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 ↔ (dom 𝑆 / 𝑆) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | brdmqss 38902 | The domain quotient binary relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Apr-2019.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑅 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴 ↔ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | brdmqssqs 38903 | If 𝐴 and 𝑅 are sets, the domain quotient binary relation and the domain quotient predicate are the same. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 14-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑅 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 DomainQs 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | n0eldmqs 38904 | The empty set is not an element of a domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 2-Mar-2018.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∅ ∈ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) | ||
| Theorem | qseq 38905* |
The quotient set equal to a class.
This theorem is used when a class 𝐴 is identified with a quotient (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅). In such a situation, every element 𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 is an 𝑅-coset [𝑣]𝑅 for some 𝑣 ∈ dom 𝑅, but there is no requirement that the "witness" 𝑣 be equal to its own block [𝑣]𝑅. 𝐴 is a set of blocks (equivalence classes), not a set of raw witnesses. In particular, when (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 is read together with a partition hypothesis 𝑅 Part 𝐴 (defined as dfpart2 39044), 𝐴 is being treated as the set of blocks [𝑣]𝑅; it does not assert any fixed-point condition 𝑣 = [𝑣]𝑅 such as would arise from the mistaken reading 𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ 𝑢 = [𝑢]𝑅. Cf. dmqsblocks 39139. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐵 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑢(𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝐵 𝑢 = [𝑣]𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | n0eldmqseq 38906 | The empty set is not an element of a domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 3-Nov-2018.) |
| ⊢ ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 → ¬ ∅ ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | n0elim 38907 | Implication of that the empty set is not an element of a class. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 → (dom (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) / (◡ E ↾ 𝐴)) = 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | n0el3 38908 | Two ways of expressing that the empty set is not an element of a class. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-May-2021.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 ↔ (dom (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) / (◡ E ↾ 𝐴)) = 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | cnvepresdmqss 38909 | The domain quotient binary relation of the restricted converse epsilon relation is equivalent to the negated elementhood of the empty set in the restriction. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 14-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ((◡ E ↾ 𝐴) DomainQss 𝐴 ↔ ¬ ∅ ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | cnvepresdmqs 38910 | The domain quotient predicate for the restricted converse epsilon relation is equivalent to the negated elementhood of the empty set in the restriction. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 14-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((◡ E ↾ 𝐴) DomainQs 𝐴 ↔ ¬ ∅ ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | unidmqs 38911 | The range of a relation is equal to the union of the domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 13-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (Rel 𝑅 → ∪ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = ran 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | unidmqseq 38912 | The union of the domain quotient of a relation is equal to the class 𝐴 if and only if the range is equal to it as well. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 21-Apr-2019.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 28-Dec-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (Rel 𝑅 → (∪ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 ↔ ran 𝑅 = 𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | dmqseqim 38913 | If the domain quotient of a relation is equal to the class 𝐴, then the range of the relation is the union of the class. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (Rel 𝑅 → ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 → ran 𝑅 = ∪ 𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | dmqseqim2 38914 | Lemma for erimeq2 38935. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (Rel 𝑅 → ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 → (𝐵 ∈ ran 𝑅 ↔ 𝐵 ∈ ∪ 𝐴)))) | ||
| Theorem | releldmqs 38915* | Elementhood in the domain quotient of a relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Apr-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (Rel 𝑅 → (𝐴 ∈ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) ↔ ∃𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅∃𝑥 ∈ [ 𝑢]𝑅𝐴 = [𝑢]𝑅))) | ||
| Theorem | eldmqs1cossres 38916* | Elementhood in the domain quotient of the class of cosets by a restriction. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 4-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐵 ∈ (dom ≀ (𝑅 ↾ 𝐴) / ≀ (𝑅 ↾ 𝐴)) ↔ ∃𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑥 ∈ [ 𝑢]𝑅𝐵 = [𝑥] ≀ (𝑅 ↾ 𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | releldmqscoss 38917* | Elementhood in the domain quotient of the class of cosets by a relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Apr-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (Rel 𝑅 → (𝐴 ∈ (dom ≀ 𝑅 / ≀ 𝑅) ↔ ∃𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅∃𝑥 ∈ [ 𝑢]𝑅𝐴 = [𝑥] ≀ 𝑅))) | ||
| Theorem | dmqscoelseq 38918 | Two ways to express the equality of the domain quotient of the coelements on the class 𝐴 with the class 𝐴. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((dom ∼ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴 ↔ (∪ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dmqs1cosscnvepreseq 38919 | Two ways to express the equality of the domain quotient of the coelements on the class 𝐴 with the class 𝐴. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((dom ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) / ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴)) = 𝐴 ↔ (∪ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴) | ||
| Definition | df-ers 38920 |
Define the class of equivalence relations on domain quotients (or: domain
quotients restricted to equivalence relations).
The present definition of equivalence relation in set.mm df-er 8637 "is not standard", "somewhat cryptic", has no constant 0-ary class and does not follow the traditional transparent reflexive-symmetric-transitive relation way of definition of equivalence. Definitions df-eqvrels 38840, dfeqvrels2 38844, dfeqvrels3 38845 and df-eqvrel 38841, dfeqvrel2 38846, dfeqvrel3 38847 are fully transparent in this regard. However, they lack the domain component (dom 𝑅 = 𝐴) of the present df-er 8637. While we acknowledge the need of a domain component, the present df-er 8637 definition does not utilize the results revealed by the new theorems in the Partition-Equivalence Theorem part below (like pets 39138 and pet 39137). From those theorems follows that the natural domain of equivalence relations is not 𝑅Domain𝐴 (i.e. dom 𝑅 = 𝐴 see brdomaing 36108), but 𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴 (i.e. (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴, see brdmqss 38902), see erimeq 38936 vs. prter3 39179. While I'm sure we need both equivalence relation df-eqvrels 38840 and equivalence relation on domain quotient df-ers 38920, I'm not sure whether we need a third equivalence relation concept with the present dom 𝑅 = 𝐴 component as well: this needs further investigation. As a default I suppose that these two concepts df-eqvrels 38840 and df-ers 38920 are enough and named the predicate version of the one on domain quotient as the alternate version df-erALTV 38921 of the present df-er 8637. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ Ers = ( DomainQss ↾ EqvRels ) | ||
| Definition | df-erALTV 38921 | Equivalence relation with natural domain predicate, see also the comment of df-ers 38920. Alternate definition is dferALTV2 38925. Binary equivalence relation with natural domain and the equivalence relation with natural domain predicate are the same when 𝐴 and 𝑅 are sets, see brerser 38934. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 12-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 ↔ ( EqvRel 𝑅 ∧ 𝑅 DomainQs 𝐴)) | ||
| Definition | df-comembers 38922 | Define the class of comember equivalence relations on their domain quotients. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 24-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ CoMembErs = {𝑎 ∣ ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝑎) Ers 𝑎} | ||
| Definition | df-comember 38923 |
Define the comember equivalence relation on the class 𝐴 (or, the
restricted coelement equivalence relation on its domain quotient 𝐴.)
Alternate definitions are dfcomember2 38930 and dfcomember3 38931.
Later on, in an application of set theory I make a distinction between the default elementhood concept and a special membership concept: membership equivalence relation will be an integral part of that membership concept. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Jun-2021.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.) |
| ⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) ErALTV 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | brers 38924 | Binary equivalence relation with natural domain, see the comment of df-ers 38920. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 Ers 𝐴 ↔ (𝑅 ∈ EqvRels ∧ 𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | dferALTV2 38925 | Equivalence relation with natural domain predicate, see the comment of df-ers 38920. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Jun-2021.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 30-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 ↔ ( EqvRel 𝑅 ∧ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | erALTVeq1 38926 | Equality theorem for equivalence relation on domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 ErALTV 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | erALTVeq1i 38927 | Equality theorem for equivalence relation on domain quotient, inference version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ 𝑅 = 𝑆 ⇒ ⊢ (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 ErALTV 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | erALTVeq1d 38928 | Equality theorem for equivalence relation on domain quotient, deduction version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 = 𝑆) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 ErALTV 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dfcomember 38929 | Alternate definition of the comember equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.) |
| ⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ∼ 𝐴 ErALTV 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dfcomember2 38930 | Alternate definition of the comember equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ( EqvRel ∼ 𝐴 ∧ (dom ∼ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dfcomember3 38931 | Alternate definition of the comember equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Sep-2021.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ( CoElEqvRel 𝐴 ∧ (∪ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | eqvreldmqs 38932 | Two ways to express comember equivalence relation on its domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Sep-2021.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ (( EqvRel ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) ∧ (dom ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) / ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴)) = 𝐴) ↔ ( CoElEqvRel 𝐴 ∧ (∪ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | eqvreldmqs2 38933 | Two ways to express comember equivalence relation on its domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ (( EqvRel ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) ∧ (dom ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) / ≀ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴)) = 𝐴) ↔ ( EqvRel ∼ 𝐴 ∧ (∪ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | brerser 38934 | Binary equivalence relation with natural domain and the equivalence relation with natural domain predicate are the same when 𝐴 and 𝑅 are sets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑅 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑅 Ers 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | erimeq2 38935 | Equivalence relation on its natural domain implies that the class of coelements on the domain is equal to the relation (this is prter3 39179 in a more convenient form , see also erimeq 38936). (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 19-Oct-2010.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (( EqvRel 𝑅 ∧ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴) → ∼ 𝐴 = 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | erimeq 38936 | Equivalence relation on its natural domain implies that the class of coelements on the domain is equal to the relation (this is the most convenient form of prter3 39179 and erimeq2 38935). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 7-Oct-2021.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 → ∼ 𝐴 = 𝑅)) | ||
| Definition | df-funss 38937 | Define the class of all function sets (but not necessarily function relations, cf. df-funsALTV 38938). It is used only by df-funsALTV 38938. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Funss = {𝑥 ∣ ≀ 𝑥 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Definition | df-funsALTV 38938 | Define the function relations class, i.e., the class of functions. Alternate definitions are dffunsALTV 38940, ... , dffunsALTV5 38944. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = ( Funss ∩ Rels ) | ||
| Definition | df-funALTV 38939 |
Define the function relation predicate, i.e., the function predicate.
This definition of the function predicate (based on a more general,
converse reflexive, relation) and the original definition of function in
set.mm df-fun 6495, are always the same, that is
( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ Fun 𝐹), see funALTVfun 38955.
The element of the class of functions and the function predicate are the same, that is (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ FunALTV 𝐹) when 𝐹 is a set, see elfunsALTVfunALTV 38954. Alternate definitions are dffunALTV2 38945, ... , dffunALTV5 38948. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ ( CnvRefRel ≀ 𝐹 ∧ Rel 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV 38940 | Alternate definition of the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 18-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ 𝑓 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV2 38941 | Alternate definition of the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ 𝑓 ⊆ I } | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV3 38942* | Alternate definition of the class of functions. For the 𝑋 axis and the 𝑌 axis you can convert the right side to {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀ x1 ∀ y1 ∀ y2 (( x1 𝑓 y1 ∧ x1 𝑓 y2 ) → y1 = y2 )}. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑢∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑢𝑓𝑥 ∧ 𝑢𝑓𝑦) → 𝑥 = 𝑦)} | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV4 38943* | Alternate definition of the class of functions. For the 𝑋 axis and the 𝑌 axis you can convert the right side to {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥1∃*𝑦1𝑥1𝑓𝑦1}. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑢∃*𝑥 𝑢𝑓𝑥} | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV5 38944* | Alternate definition of the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥 ∈ ran 𝑓∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝑓(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ([𝑥]◡𝑓 ∩ [𝑦]◡𝑓) = ∅)} | ||
| Theorem | dffunALTV2 38945 | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV2 38971. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 8-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ⊆ I ∧ Rel 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | dffunALTV3 38946* | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV3 38972. Reproduction of dffun2 6503. For the 𝑋 axis and the 𝑌 axis you can convert the right side to (∀ x1 ∀ y1 ∀ y2 (( x1 𝑓 y1 ∧ x1 𝑓 y2 ) → y1 = y2 ) ∧ Rel 𝐹). (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1996.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ (∀𝑢∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑢𝐹𝑥 ∧ 𝑢𝐹𝑦) → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ∧ Rel 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | dffunALTV4 38947* | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV4 38973. This is dffun6 6504. For the 𝑋 axis and the 𝑌 axis you can convert the right side to (∀𝑥1∃*𝑦1𝑥1𝐹𝑦1 ∧ Rel 𝐹). (Contributed by NM, 9-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ (∀𝑢∃*𝑥 𝑢𝐹𝑥 ∧ Rel 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | dffunALTV5 38948* | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV5 38974. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ ran 𝐹∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ([𝑥]◡𝐹 ∩ [𝑦]◡𝐹) = ∅) ∧ Rel 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV 38949 | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ∈ CnvRefRels ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV2 38950 | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ⊆ I ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV3 38951* | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ (∀𝑢∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑢𝐹𝑥 ∧ 𝑢𝐹𝑦) → 𝑥 = 𝑦) ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV4 38952* | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ (∀𝑢∃*𝑥 𝑢𝐹𝑥 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV5 38953* | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ (∀𝑥 ∈ ran 𝐹∀𝑦 ∈ ran 𝐹(𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ ([𝑥]◡𝐹 ∩ [𝑦]◡𝐹) = ∅) ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTVfunALTV 38954 | The element of the class of functions and the function predicate are the same when 𝐹 is a set. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ FunALTV 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVfun 38955 | Our definition of the function predicate df-funALTV 38939 (based on a more general, converse reflexive, relation) and the original definition of function in set.mm df-fun 6495, are always the same and interchangeable. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ Fun 𝐹) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVss 38956 | Subclass theorem for function. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → ( FunALTV 𝐵 → FunALTV 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVeq 38957 | Equality theorem for function predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVeqi 38958 | Equality inference for the function predicate. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVeqd 38959 | Equality deduction for the function predicate. (Contributed by NM, 23-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵)) | ||
| Definition | df-disjss 38960 | Define the class of all disjoint sets (but not necessarily disjoint relations, cf. df-disjs 38961). It is used only by df-disjs 38961. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjss = {𝑥 ∣ ≀ ◡𝑥 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Definition | df-disjs 38961 |
Define the disjoint relations class, i.e., the class of disjoints. We
need Disjs for the definition of Parts and Part
for the
Partition-Equivalence Theorems: this need for Parts as disjoint relations
on their domain quotients is the reason why we must define Disjs
instead of simply using converse functions (cf. dfdisjALTV 38970).
The element of the class of disjoints and the disjoint predicate are the same, that is (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ Disj 𝑅) when 𝑅 is a set, see eldisjsdisj 38996. Alternate definitions are dfdisjs 38965, ... , dfdisjs5 38969. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = ( Disjss ∩ Rels ) | ||
| Definition | df-disjALTV 38962 |
Define the disjoint relation predicate, i.e., the disjoint predicate. A
disjoint relation is a converse function of the relation by dfdisjALTV 38970,
see the comment of df-disjs 38961 why we need disjoint relations instead of
converse functions anyway.
The element of the class of disjoints and the disjoint predicate are the same, that is (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ Disj 𝑅) when 𝑅 is a set, see eldisjsdisj 38996. Alternate definitions are dfdisjALTV 38970, ... , dfdisjALTV5 38974. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ ( CnvRefRel ≀ ◡𝑅 ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Definition | df-eldisjs 38963 | Define the disjoint element relations class, i.e., the disjoint elements class. The element of the disjoint elements class and the disjoint elementhood predicate are the same, that is (𝐴 ∈ ElDisjs ↔ ElDisj 𝐴) when 𝐴 is a set, see eleldisjseldisj 39001. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.) |
| ⊢ ElDisjs = {𝑎 ∣ (◡ E ↾ 𝑎) ∈ Disjs } | ||
| Definition | df-eldisj 38964 |
Define the disjoint element relation predicate, i.e., the disjoint
elementhood predicate. Read: the elements of 𝐴 are disjoint. The
element of the disjoint elements class and the disjoint elementhood
predicate are the same, that is (𝐴 ∈ ElDisjs ↔ ElDisj 𝐴) when
𝐴 is a set, see eleldisjseldisj 39001.
As of now, disjoint elementhood is defined as "partition" in set.mm : compare df-prt 39169 with dfeldisj5 38985. See also the comments of dfmembpart2 39045 and of df-parts 39040. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ Disj (◡ E ↾ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs 38965 | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 18-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ ◡𝑟 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs2 38966 | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ ◡𝑟 ⊆ I } | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs3 38967* | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑢∀𝑣∀𝑥((𝑢𝑟𝑥 ∧ 𝑣𝑟𝑥) → 𝑢 = 𝑣)} | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs4 38968* | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥∃*𝑢 𝑢𝑟𝑥} | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs5 38969* | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑟∀𝑣 ∈ dom 𝑟(𝑢 = 𝑣 ∨ ([𝑢]𝑟 ∩ [𝑣]𝑟) = ∅)} | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV 38970 | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate. A disjoint relation is a converse function of the relation, see the comment of df-disjs 38961 why we need disjoint relations instead of converse functions anyway. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ ( FunALTV ◡𝑅 ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV2 38971 | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV2 38945. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ ( ≀ ◡𝑅 ⊆ I ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV3 38972* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV3 38946. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑢∀𝑣∀𝑥((𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ 𝑣𝑅𝑥) → 𝑢 = 𝑣) ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV4 38973* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV4 38947. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑥∃*𝑢 𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV5 38974* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV5 38948. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑣 ∈ dom 𝑅(𝑢 = 𝑣 ∨ ([𝑢]𝑅 ∩ [𝑣]𝑅) = ∅) ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV5a 38975* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate. Disj 𝑅 means: different domain generators have disjoint cosets (unless the generators are equal), plus Rel 𝑅 for relation-typedness. This is the characterization that makes canonicity/uniqueness arguments modular. It is the starting point for the entire "Disj ↔ unique representative per block" pipeline that feeds into Disjs, see dfdisjs7 39115. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 3-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑣 ∈ dom 𝑅(([𝑢]𝑅 ∩ [𝑣]𝑅) ≠ ∅ → 𝑢 = 𝑣) ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | disjimeceqim 38976* | Disj implies coset-equality injectivity (domain-wise). Extracts the practical consequence of Disj: the map 𝑢 ↦ [𝑢]𝑅 is injective on dom 𝑅. This is exactly the "canonicity" property used repeatedly when turning ∃* into ∃! and when reasoning about uniqueness of representatives. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 3-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 → ∀𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑣 ∈ dom 𝑅([𝑢]𝑅 = [𝑣]𝑅 → 𝑢 = 𝑣)) | ||
| Theorem | disjimeceqim2 38977 | Disj implies injectivity (pairwise form). The same content as disjimeceqim 38976 but packaged for direct use with explicit hypotheses (𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ dom 𝑅). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 16-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 → ((𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ dom 𝑅) → ([𝐴]𝑅 = [𝐵]𝑅 → 𝐴 = 𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | disjimeceqbi 38978* | Disj gives biconditional injectivity (domain-wise). Strengthens injectivity to an iff. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 3-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 → ∀𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑣 ∈ dom 𝑅([𝑢]𝑅 = [𝑣]𝑅 ↔ 𝑢 = 𝑣)) | ||
| Theorem | disjimeceqbi2 38979 | Injectivity of the block constructor under disjointness. suc11reg 9532 analogue: under disjointness, equal blocks force equal generators (on dom 𝑅). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 16-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 → ((𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ dom 𝑅) → ([𝐴]𝑅 = [𝐵]𝑅 ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | disjimrmoeqec 38980* | Under Disj, every block has a unique generator (∃* form). If 𝑡 is a block in the quotient sense, then there is a uniquely determined 𝑢 in dom 𝑅 such that 𝑡 = [𝑢]𝑅. This is the existence+uniqueness engine behind Disjs and QMap characterizations: it is the "representative theorem" from which the ∃! forms are obtained. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 → ∃*𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑡 = [𝑢]𝑅) | ||
| Theorem | disjimdmqseq 38981* | Disjointness implies unique-generation of quotient blocks. Converts existence-quotient comprehension (see df-qs 8643) into a uniqueness-comprehension under disjointness; rewrites (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) carriers as exactly the class of blocks with a unique representative. This is the "unique generator per block" content in a carrier-normal form. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 → (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = {𝑡 ∣ ∃!𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑡 = [𝑢]𝑅}) | ||
| Theorem | dfeldisj2 38982 | Alternate definition of the disjoint elementhood predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ ≀ ◡(◡ E ↾ 𝐴) ⊆ I ) | ||
| Theorem | dfeldisj3 38983* | Alternate definition of the disjoint elementhood predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑢 ∩ 𝑣)𝑢 = 𝑣) | ||
| Theorem | dfeldisj4 38984* | Alternate definition of the disjoint elementhood predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥∃*𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 ∈ 𝑢) | ||
| Theorem | dfeldisj5 38985* | Alternate definition of the disjoint elementhood predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑢 = 𝑣 ∨ (𝑢 ∩ 𝑣) = ∅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfeldisj5a 38986* | Alternate definition of the disjoint elementhood predicate. Members of 𝐴 are pairwise disjoint: if two members overlap, they are equal. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑣 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑢 ∩ 𝑣) ≠ ∅ → 𝑢 = 𝑣)) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjim3 38987 | ElDisj elimination (two chosen elements). Standard specialization lemma: from ElDisj 𝐴 infer the disjointness condition for two specific elements. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 6-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 → ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → ((𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) ≠ ∅ → 𝐵 = 𝐶))) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjdmqsim2 38988 | ElDisj of quotient implies coset-disjointness (domain form). Converts element-disjointness of the quotient carrier into a usable "cosets don't overlap unless equal" rule. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 10-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (( ElDisj (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ) → ((𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅 ∧ 𝑣 ∈ dom 𝑅) → (([𝑢]𝑅 ∩ [𝑣]𝑅) ≠ ∅ → [𝑢]𝑅 = [𝑣]𝑅))) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjdmqsim 38989* | Shared output implies equal cosets (under ElDisj of quotient): if 𝑢 and 𝑣 both relate to the same 𝑥, then their cosets intersect, hence must coincide under quotient ElDisj. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 10-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (( ElDisj (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ) → ((𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ 𝑣𝑅𝑥) → [𝑢]𝑅 = [𝑣]𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | suceldisj 38990* | Disjointness of successor enforces element-carrier separation: If 𝐵 is the successor of 𝐴 and 𝐵 is element-disjoint as a family, then no element of 𝐴 can itself be a member of 𝐴 (equivalently, every 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 has empty intersection with the carrier 𝐴). Provides a clean bridge between "disjoint family at the next grade" and "no block contains a block of the same family" at the previous grade: MembPart alone does not enforce this, see dfmembpart2 39045 (it gives disjoint blocks and excludes the empty block, but does not prevent 𝑢 ∈ 𝑚 from also being a member of the carrier 𝑚). This lemma is used to justify when grade-stability (via successor-shift) supplies the extra separation axioms needed in roof/root-style carrier reasoning. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 18-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ElDisj 𝐵 ∧ suc 𝐴 = 𝐵) → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 ∩ 𝐴) = ∅) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs 38991 | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ ( ≀ ◡𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs2 38992 | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ ( ≀ ◡𝑅 ⊆ I ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs3 38993* | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ (∀𝑢∀𝑣∀𝑥((𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ 𝑣𝑅𝑥) → 𝑢 = 𝑣) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs4 38994* | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ (∀𝑥∃*𝑢 𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs5 38995* | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ (∀𝑢 ∈ dom 𝑅∀𝑣 ∈ dom 𝑅(𝑢 = 𝑣 ∨ ([𝑢]𝑅 ∩ [𝑣]𝑅) = ∅) ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels ))) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjsdisj 38996 | The element of the class of disjoint relations and the disjoint relation predicate are the same, that is (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ Disj 𝑅) when 𝑅 is a set. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ Disj 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | qmapeldisjs 38997 | When 𝑅 is a set (e.g., when it is an element of the class of relations df-rels 38612), the quotient map element of the class of disjoint relations and the disjoint relation predicate for quotient maps are the same. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 12-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → ( QMap 𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ Disj QMap 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | disjqmap2 38998* | Disjointness of QMap equals ∃*-generation. Pairs with disjqmap 38999 and raldmqseu 38537 to move between ∃* and ∃! depending on context. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 12-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → ( Disj QMap 𝑅 ↔ ∀𝑢∃*𝑡 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑢 = [𝑡]𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | disjqmap 38999* | Disjointness of QMap equals unique generation of the quotient carrier. The cleaned, carrier-respecting version of disjqmap2 38998. This is the statement "each equivalence class has a unique representative" for the general coset carrier (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 12-Feb-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → ( Disj QMap 𝑅 ↔ ∀𝑢 ∈ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅)∃!𝑡 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑢 = [𝑡]𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | eleldisjs 39000 | Elementhood in the disjoint elements class. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ ElDisjs ↔ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) ∈ Disjs )) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |