| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 393 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: | (1-31067) |
(31068-32590) |
(32591-50390) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | cnvepresdmqs 39201 | 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 39202 | 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 39203 | 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 39204 | 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 39205 | Lemma for erimeq2 39226. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (Rel 𝑅 → ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 → (𝐵 ∈ ran 𝑅 ↔ 𝐵 ∈ ∪ 𝐴)))) | ||
| Theorem | releldmqs 39206* | 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 39207* | 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 39208* | 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 39209 | 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 39210 | 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 39211 |
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 8673 "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 39131, dfeqvrels2 39135, dfeqvrels3 39136 and df-eqvrel 39132, dfeqvrel2 39137, dfeqvrel3 39138 are fully transparent in this regard. However, they lack the domain component (dom 𝑅 = 𝐴) of the present df-er 8673. While we acknowledge the need of a domain component, the present df-er 8673 definition does not utilize the results revealed by the new theorems in the Partition-Equivalence Theorem part below (like pets 39429 and pet 39428). From those theorems follows that the natural domain of equivalence relations is not 𝑅Domain𝐴 (i.e. dom 𝑅 = 𝐴 see brdomaing 36247), but 𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴 (i.e. (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴, see brdmqss 39193), see erimeq 39227 vs. prter3 39470. While I'm sure we need both equivalence relation df-eqvrels 39131 and equivalence relation on domain quotient df-ers 39211, 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 39131 and df-ers 39211 are enough and named the predicate version of the one on domain quotient as the alternate version df-erALTV 39212 of the present df-er 8673. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ Ers = ( DomainQss ↾ EqvRels ) | ||
| Definition | df-erALTV 39212 | Equivalence relation with natural domain predicate, see also the comment of df-ers 39211. Alternate definition is dferALTV2 39216. 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 39225. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 12-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 ↔ ( EqvRel 𝑅 ∧ 𝑅 DomainQs 𝐴)) | ||
| Definition | df-comembers 39213 | 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 39214 |
Define the comember equivalence relation on the class 𝐴 (or, the
restricted coelement equivalence relation on its domain quotient 𝐴.)
Alternate definitions are dfcomember2 39221 and dfcomember3 39222.
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 39215 | Binary equivalence relation with natural domain, see the comment of df-ers 39211. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 Ers 𝐴 ↔ (𝑅 ∈ EqvRels ∧ 𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | dferALTV2 39216 | Equivalence relation with natural domain predicate, see the comment of df-ers 39211. (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 39217 | 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 39218 | 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 39219 | 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 39220 | Alternate definition of the comember equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.) |
| ⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ∼ 𝐴 ErALTV 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dfcomember2 39221 | Alternate definition of the comember equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ( EqvRel ∼ 𝐴 ∧ (dom ∼ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dfcomember3 39222 | 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 39223 | 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 39224 | 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 39225 | 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 39226 | Equivalence relation on its natural domain implies that the class of coelements on the domain is equal to the relation (this is prter3 39470 in a more convenient form , see also erimeq 39227). (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 39227 | 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 39470 and erimeq2 39226). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 7-Oct-2021.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 → ∼ 𝐴 = 𝑅)) | ||
| Definition | df-funss 39228 | Define the class of all function sets (but not necessarily function relations, cf. df-funsALTV 39229). It is used only by df-funsALTV 39229. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Funss = {𝑥 ∣ ≀ 𝑥 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Definition | df-funsALTV 39229 | Define the function relations class, i.e., the class of functions. Alternate definitions are dffunsALTV 39231, ... , dffunsALTV5 39235. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = ( Funss ∩ Rels ) | ||
| Definition | df-funALTV 39230 |
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 6519, are always the same, that is
( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ Fun 𝐹), see funALTVfun 39246.
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 39245. Alternate definitions are dffunALTV2 39236, ... , dffunALTV5 39239. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ ( CnvRefRel ≀ 𝐹 ∧ Rel 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV 39231 | Alternate definition of the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 18-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ 𝑓 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV2 39232 | Alternate definition of the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ 𝑓 ⊆ I } | ||
| Theorem | dffunsALTV3 39233* | 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 39234* | 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 39235* | 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 39236 | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV2 39262. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 8-Feb-2018.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ⊆ I ∧ Rel 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | dffunALTV3 39237* | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV3 39263. Reproduction of dffun2 6527. 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 39238* | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV4 39264. This is dffun6 6528. 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 39239* | Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV5 39265. (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 39240 | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ∈ CnvRefRels ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV2 39241 | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ⊆ I ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV3 39242* | 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 39243* | Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ (∀𝑢∃*𝑥 𝑢𝐹𝑥 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | elfunsALTV5 39244* | 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 39245 | 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 39246 | Our definition of the function predicate df-funALTV 39230 (based on a more general, converse reflexive, relation) and the original definition of function in set.mm df-fun 6519, are always the same and interchangeable. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ Fun 𝐹) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVss 39247 | 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 39248 | Equality theorem for function predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVeqi 39249 | Equality inference for the function predicate. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | funALTVeqd 39250 | Equality deduction for the function predicate. (Contributed by NM, 23-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵)) | ||
| Definition | df-disjss 39251 | Define the class of all disjoint sets (but not necessarily disjoint relations, cf. df-disjs 39252). It is used only by df-disjs 39252. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjss = {𝑥 ∣ ≀ ◡𝑥 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Definition | df-disjs 39252 |
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 39261).
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 39287. Alternate definitions are dfdisjs 39256, ... , dfdisjs5 39260. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = ( Disjss ∩ Rels ) | ||
| Definition | df-disjALTV 39253 |
Define the disjoint relation predicate, i.e., the disjoint predicate. A
disjoint relation is a converse function of the relation by dfdisjALTV 39261,
see the comment of df-disjs 39252 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 39287. Alternate definitions are dfdisjALTV 39261, ... , dfdisjALTV5 39265. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ ( CnvRefRel ≀ ◡𝑅 ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Definition | df-eldisjs 39254 | 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 39292. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.) |
| ⊢ ElDisjs = {𝑎 ∣ (◡ E ↾ 𝑎) ∈ Disjs } | ||
| Definition | df-eldisj 39255 |
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 39292.
As of now, disjoint elementhood is defined as "partition" in set.mm : compare df-prt 39460 with dfeldisj5 39276. See also the comments of dfmembpart2 39336 and of df-parts 39331. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ Disj (◡ E ↾ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs 39256 | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 18-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ ◡𝑟 ∈ CnvRefRels } | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs2 39257 | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ ◡𝑟 ⊆ I } | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs3 39258* | 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 39259* | Alternate definition of the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ Disjs = {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥∃*𝑢 𝑢𝑟𝑥} | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjs5 39260* | 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 39261 | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate. A disjoint relation is a converse function of the relation, see the comment of df-disjs 39252 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 39262 | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV2 39236. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ ( ≀ ◡𝑅 ⊆ I ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV3 39263* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV3 39237. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑢∀𝑣∀𝑥((𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ 𝑣𝑅𝑥) → 𝑢 = 𝑣) ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV4 39264* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV4 39238. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 ↔ (∀𝑥∃*𝑢 𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ Rel 𝑅)) | ||
| Theorem | dfdisjALTV5 39265* | Alternate definition of the disjoint relation predicate, cf. dffunALTV5 39239. (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 39266* | 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 39406. (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 39267* | 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 39268 | Disj implies injectivity (pairwise form). The same content as disjimeceqim 39267 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 39269* | 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 39270 | Injectivity of the block constructor under disjointness. suc11reg 9571 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 39271* | 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 39272* | Disjointness implies unique-generation of quotient blocks. Converts existence-quotient comprehension (see df-qs 8679) 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 39273 | Alternate definition of the disjoint elementhood predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ ≀ ◡(◡ E ↾ 𝐴) ⊆ I ) | ||
| Theorem | dfeldisj3 39274* | 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 39275* | Alternate definition of the disjoint elementhood predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( ElDisj 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥∃*𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 ∈ 𝑢) | ||
| Theorem | dfeldisj5 39276* | 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 39277* | 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 39278 | 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 39279 | 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 39280* | 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 39281* | 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 39336 (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 39282 | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ ( ≀ ◡𝑅 ∈ CnvRefRels ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs2 39283 | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ ( ≀ ◡𝑅 ⊆ I ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs3 39284* | 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 39285* | Elementhood in the class of disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 ∈ Disjs ↔ (∀𝑥∃*𝑢 𝑢𝑅𝑥 ∧ 𝑅 ∈ Rels )) | ||
| Theorem | eldisjs5 39286* | 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 39287 | 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 39288 | When 𝑅 is a set (e.g., when it is an element of the class of relations df-rels 38903), 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 39289* | Disjointness of QMap equals ∃*-generation. Pairs with disjqmap 39290 and raldmqseu 38828 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 39290* | Disjointness of QMap equals unique generation of the quotient carrier. The cleaned, carrier-respecting version of disjqmap2 39289. 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 39291 | Elementhood in the disjoint elements class. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ ElDisjs ↔ (◡ E ↾ 𝐴) ∈ Disjs )) | ||
| Theorem | eleldisjseldisj 39292 | 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. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ ElDisjs ↔ ElDisj 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | disjrel 39293 | Disjoint relation is a relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 15-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ ( Disj 𝑅 → Rel 𝑅) | ||
| Theorem | disjss 39294 | Subclass theorem for disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Oct-2020.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → ( Disj 𝐵 → Disj 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | disjssi 39295 | Subclass theorem for disjoints, inference version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ ( Disj 𝐵 → Disj 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | disjssd 39296 | Subclass theorem for disjoints, deduction version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ( Disj 𝐵 → Disj 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | disjeq 39297 | Equality theorem for disjoints. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → ( Disj 𝐴 ↔ Disj 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | disjeqi 39298 | Equality theorem for disjoints, inference version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ ( Disj 𝐴 ↔ Disj 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | disjeqd 39299 | Equality theorem for disjoints, deduction version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 22-Sep-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ( Disj 𝐴 ↔ Disj 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | disjdmqseqeq1 39300 | Lemma for the equality theorem for partition parteq1 39340. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 5-Oct-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (( Disj 𝑅 ∧ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴) ↔ ( Disj 𝑆 ∧ (dom 𝑆 / 𝑆) = 𝐴))) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |