| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 392 of 504) | < 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: | (1-31014) |
(31015-32537) |
(32538-50302) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | dmqseqeq1 39101 | Equality theorem for domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Apr-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 ↔ (dom 𝑆 / 𝑆) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dmqseqeq1i 39102 | Equality theorem for domain quotient, inference version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ 𝑅 = 𝑆 ⇒ ⊢ ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 ↔ (dom 𝑆 / 𝑆) = 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dmqseqeq1d 39103 | 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 39104 | 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 39105 | 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 39106 | The empty set is not an element of a domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 2-Mar-2018.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∅ ∈ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) | ||
| Theorem | qseq 39107* |
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 39246), 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 39341. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Oct-2018.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐵 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑢(𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝐵 𝑢 = [𝑣]𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | n0eldmqseq 39108 | 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 39109 | 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 39110 | 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 39111 | 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 39112 | 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 39113 | 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 39114 | 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 39115 | 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 39116 | Lemma for erimeq2 39137. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (Rel 𝑅 → ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 → (𝐵 ∈ ran 𝑅 ↔ 𝐵 ∈ ∪ 𝐴)))) | ||
| Theorem | releldmqs 39117* | 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 39118* | 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 39119* | 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 39120 | 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 39121 | 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 39122 |
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 8640 "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 39042, dfeqvrels2 39046, dfeqvrels3 39047 and df-eqvrel 39043, dfeqvrel2 39048, dfeqvrel3 39049 are fully transparent in this regard. However, they lack the domain component (dom 𝑅 = 𝐴) of the present df-er 8640. While we acknowledge the need of a domain component, the present df-er 8640 definition does not utilize the results revealed by the new theorems in the Partition-Equivalence Theorem part below (like pets 39340 and pet 39339). From those theorems follows that the natural domain of equivalence relations is not 𝑅Domain𝐴 (i.e. dom 𝑅 = 𝐴 see brdomaing 36168), but 𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴 (i.e. (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴, see brdmqss 39104), see erimeq 39138 vs. prter3 39381. While I'm sure we need both equivalence relation df-eqvrels 39042 and equivalence relation on domain quotient df-ers 39122, 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 39042 and df-ers 39122 are enough and named the predicate version of the one on domain quotient as the alternate version df-erALTV 39123 of the present df-er 8640. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ Ers = ( DomainQss ↾ EqvRels ) | ||
| Definition | df-erALTV 39123 | Equivalence relation with natural domain predicate, see also the comment of df-ers 39122. Alternate definition is dferALTV2 39127. 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 39136. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 12-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 ↔ ( EqvRel 𝑅 ∧ 𝑅 DomainQs 𝐴)) | ||
| Definition | df-comembers 39124 | 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 39125 |
Define the comember equivalence relation on the class 𝐴 (or, the
restricted coelement equivalence relation on its domain quotient 𝐴.)
Alternate definitions are dfcomember2 39132 and dfcomember3 39133.
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 39126 | Binary equivalence relation with natural domain, see the comment of df-ers 39122. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 Ers 𝐴 ↔ (𝑅 ∈ EqvRels ∧ 𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | dferALTV2 39127 | Equivalence relation with natural domain predicate, see the comment of df-ers 39122. (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 39128 | 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 39129 | 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 39130 | 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 39131 | Alternate definition of the comember equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.) |
| ⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ∼ 𝐴 ErALTV 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dfcomember2 39132 | Alternate definition of the comember equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ( EqvRel ∼ 𝐴 ∧ (dom ∼ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dfcomember3 39133 | 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 39134 | 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 39135 | 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 39136 | 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 39137 | Equivalence relation on its natural domain implies that the class of coelements on the domain is equal to the relation (this is prter3 39381 in a more convenient form , see also erimeq 39138). (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 39138 | 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 39381 and erimeq2 39137). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 7-Oct-2021.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 → ∼ 𝐴 = 𝑅)) | ||
| Definition | df-funss 39139 | Define the class of all function sets (but not necessarily function relations, cf. df-funsALTV 39140). It is used only by df-funsALTV 39140. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Funss = {𝑥 ∣ ≀ 𝑥 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Definition | df-funsALTV 39140 | Define the function relations class, i.e., the class of functions. Alternate definitions are dffunsALTV 39142, ... , dffunsALTV5 39146. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = ( Funss ∩ Rels ) | ||
| Definition | df-funALTV 39141 |
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 6494, are always the same, that is
( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ Fun 𝐹), see funALTVfun 39157.
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 39156. Alternate definitions are dffunALTV2 39147, ... , dffunALTV5 39150. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ ( CnvRefRel ≀ 𝐹 ∧ Rel 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV 39142 | Alternate definition of the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 18-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ 𝑓 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV2 39143 | Alternate definition of the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ 𝑓 ⊆ I } | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV3 39144* | 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 39145* | 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 39146* | 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 39147 | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV2 39173. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 8-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ⊆ I ∧ Rel 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | dffunALTV3 39148* | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV3 39174. Reproduction of dffun2 6502. 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 39149* | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV4 39175. This is dffun6 6503. 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 39150* | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV5 39176. (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 39151 | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ∈ CnvRefRels ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV2 39152 | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ⊆ I ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV3 39153* | 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 39154* | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ (∀𝑢∃*𝑥 𝑢𝐹𝑥 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV5 39155* | 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 39156 | 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 39157 | Our definition of the function predicate df-funALTV 39141 (based on a more general, converse reflexive, relation) and the original definition of function in set.mm df-fun 6494, are always the same and interchangeable. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ Fun 𝐹) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVss 39158 | 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 39159 | Equality theorem for function predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVeqi 39160 | Equality inference for the function predicate. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVeqd 39161 | Equality deduction for the function predicate. (Contributed by NM, 23-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵)) | ||
| Definition | df-disjss 39162 | Define the class of all disjoint sets (but not necessarily disjoint relations, cf. df-disjs 39163). It is used only by df-disjs 39163. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjss = {𝑥 ∣ ≀ ◡𝑥 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Definition | df-disjs 39163 |
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 39172).
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 39198. Alternate definitions are dfdisjs 39167, ... , dfdisjs5 39171. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = ( Disjss ∩ Rels ) | ||
| Definition | df-disjALTV 39164 |
Define the disjoint relation predicate, i.e., the disjoint predicate. A
disjoint relation is a converse function of the relation by dfdisjALTV 39172,
see the comment of df-disjs 39163 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 39198. Alternate definitions are dfdisjALTV 39172, ... , dfdisjALTV5 39176. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ ( CnvRefRel ≀ ◡𝑅 ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Definition | df-eldisjs 39165 | 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 39203. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.) |
| ⊢ ElDisjs = {𝑎 ∣ (◡ E ↾ 𝑎) ∈ Disjs } | ||
| Definition | df-eldisj 39166 |
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 39203.
As of now, disjoint elementhood is defined as "partition" in set.mm : compare df-prt 39371 with dfeldisj5 39187. See also the comments of dfmembpart2 39247 and of df-parts 39242. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ Disj (◡ E ↾ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs 39167 | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 18-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ ◡𝑟 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs2 39168 | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ ◡𝑟 ⊆ I } | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs3 39169* | 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 39170* | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥∃*𝑢 𝑢𝑟𝑥} | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs5 39171* | 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 39172 | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate. A disjoint relation is a converse function of the relation, see the comment of df-disjs 39163 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 39173 | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV2 39147. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ ( ≀ ◡𝑅 ⊆ I ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV3 39174* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV3 39148. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑢∀𝑣∀𝑥((𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ 𝑣𝑅𝑥) → 𝑢 = 𝑣) ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV4 39175* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV4 39149. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑥∃*𝑢 𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV5 39176* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV5 39150. (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 39177* | 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 39317. (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 39178* | 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 39179 | Disj implies injectivity (pairwise form). The same content as disjimeceqim 39178 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 39180* | 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 39181 | Injectivity of the block constructor under disjointness. suc11reg 9538 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 39182* | 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 39183* | Disjointness implies unique-generation of quotient blocks. Converts existence-quotient comprehension (see df-qs 8646) 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 39184 | Alternate definition of the disjoint elementhood predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ ≀ ◡(◡ E ↾ 𝐴) ⊆ I ) | ||
| Theorem | dfeldisj3 39185* | 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 39186* | Alternate definition of the disjoint elementhood predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥∃*𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 ∈ 𝑢) | ||
| Theorem | dfeldisj5 39187* | 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 39188* | 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 39189 | 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 39190 | 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 39191* | 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 39192* | 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 39247 (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 39193 | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ ( ≀ ◡𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs2 39194 | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ ( ≀ ◡𝑅 ⊆ I ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs3 39195* | 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 39196* | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ (∀𝑥∃*𝑢 𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs5 39197* | 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 39198 | 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 39199 | When 𝑅 is a set (e.g., when it is an element of the class of relations df-rels 38814), 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 39200* | Disjointness of QMap equals ∃*-generation. Pairs with disjqmap 39201 and raldmqseu 38739 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)) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |