P. 393 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 39201-39300   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	eqvrelsymb 39201	An equivalence relation is symmetric. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jul-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised and distinct variable conditions removed by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝐵𝑅𝐴))
Theorem	eqvreltr 39202	An equivalence relation is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴𝑅𝐵 ∧ 𝐵𝑅𝐶) → 𝐴𝑅𝐶))
Theorem	eqvreltrd 39203	A transitivity relation for equivalences. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵𝑅𝐶)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐶)
Theorem	eqvreltr4d 39204	A transitivity relation for equivalences. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶𝑅𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐶)
Theorem	eqvrelref 39205	An equivalence relation is reflexive on its field. Compare Theorem 3M of [Enderton] p. 56. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-May-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐴)
Theorem	eqvrelth 39206	Basic property of equivalence relations. Theorem 73 of [Suppes] p. 82. (Contributed by NM, 23-Jul-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 6-Jul-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ [𝐴]𝑅 = [𝐵]𝑅))
Theorem	eqvrelcl 39207	Elementhood in the field of an equivalence relation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelthi 39208	Basic property of equivalence relations. Part of Lemma 3N of [Enderton] p. 57. (Contributed by NM, 30-Jul-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴𝑅𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → [𝐴]𝑅 = [𝐵]𝑅)
Theorem	eqvreldisj 39209	Equivalence classes do not overlap. In other words, two equivalence classes are either equal or disjoint. Theorem 74 of [Suppes] p. 83. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jun-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 2-Jun-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel 𝑅 → ([𝐴]𝑅 = [𝐵]𝑅 ∨ ([𝐴]𝑅 ∩ [𝐵]𝑅) = ∅))
Theorem	qsdisjALTV 39210	Elements of a quotient set do not overlap. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 12-Oct-2010.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 11-Jul-2014.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 3-Jun-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → EqvRel 𝑅)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ (𝐴 / 𝑅))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ (𝐴 / 𝑅))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) = ∅))
Theorem	eqvrelqsel 39211	If an element of a quotient set contains a given element, it is equal to the equivalence class of the element. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 12-Aug-2015.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 28-Dec-2019.)
⊢ (( EqvRel 𝑅 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ (𝐴 / 𝑅) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝐵 = [𝐶]𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelcoss 39212	Two ways to express equivalent cosets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 4-Jul-2020.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 20-Dec-2021.)
⊢ ( EqvRel ≀ 𝑅 ↔ TrRel ≀ 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelcoss3 39213*	Two ways to express equivalent cosets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Apr-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel ≀ 𝑅 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧((𝑥 ≀ 𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ≀ 𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥 ≀ 𝑅𝑧))
Theorem	eqvrelcoss2 39214	Two ways to express equivalent cosets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 3-May-2019.)
⊢ ( EqvRel ≀ 𝑅 ↔ ≀ ≀ 𝑅 ⊆ ≀ 𝑅)
Theorem	eqvrelcoss4 39215*	Two ways to express equivalent cosets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 3-May-2019.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 30-Sep-2021.)
⊢ ( EqvRel ≀ 𝑅 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑧(([𝑥] ≀ 𝑅 ∩ [𝑧] ≀ 𝑅) ≠ ∅ → ([𝑥]◡𝑅 ∩ [𝑧]◡𝑅) ≠ ∅))
Theorem	dfcoeleqvrels 39216	Alternate definition of the coelement equivalence relations class. Other alternate definitions should be based on eqvrelcoss2 39214, eqvrelcoss3 39213 and eqvrelcoss4 39215 when needed. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.)
⊢ CoElEqvRels = {𝑎 ∣ ∼ 𝑎 ∈ EqvRels }
Theorem	dfcoeleqvrel 39217	Alternate definition of the coelement equivalence relation predicate: a coelement equivalence relation is an equivalence relation on coelements. Other alternate definitions should be based on eqvrelcoss2 39214, eqvrelcoss3 39213 and eqvrelcoss4 39215 when needed. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.)
⊢ ( CoElEqvRel 𝐴 ↔ EqvRel ∼ 𝐴)
21.26.15  Redundancy
Definition	df-redunds 39218*	Define the class of all redundant sets 𝑥 with respect to 𝑦 in 𝑧. For sets, binary relation on the class of all redundant sets (brredunds 39221) is equivalent to satisfying the redundancy predicate (df-redund 39219). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Oct-2022.)
⊢ Redunds = ◡{⟨⟨𝑦, 𝑧⟩, 𝑥⟩ ∣ (𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 ∧ (𝑥 ∩ 𝑧) = (𝑦 ∩ 𝑧))}
Definition	df-redund 39219	Define the redundancy predicate. Read: 𝐴 is redundant with respect to 𝐵 in 𝐶. For sets, binary relation on the class of all redundant sets (brredunds 39221) is equivalent to satisfying the redundancy predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (𝐴 Redund ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ ↔ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ (𝐴 ∩ 𝐶) = (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶)))
Definition	df-redundp 39220	Define the redundancy operator for propositions, cf. df-redund 39219. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Oct-2022.)
⊢ ( redund (𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))))
Theorem	brredunds 39221	Binary relation on the class of all redundant sets. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Oct-2022.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑋) → (𝐴 Redunds ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ ↔ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ (𝐴 ∩ 𝐶) = (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶))))
Theorem	brredundsredund 39222	For sets, binary relation on the class of all redundant sets (brredunds 39221) is equivalent to satisfying the redundancy predicate (df-redund 39219). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Oct-2022.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝑋) → (𝐴 Redunds ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ ↔ 𝐴 Redund ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩))
Theorem	redundss3 39223	Implication of redundancy predicate. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ 𝐷 ⊆ 𝐶    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 Redund ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ → 𝐴 Redund ⟨𝐵, 𝐷⟩)
Theorem	redundeq1 39224	Equivalence of redundancy predicates. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐷    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 Redund ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩ ↔ 𝐷 Redund ⟨𝐵, 𝐶⟩)
Theorem	redundpim3 39225	Implication of redundancy of proposition. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ ( redund (𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) → redund (𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜃))
Theorem	redundpbi1 39226	Equivalence of redundancy of propositions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ ( redund (𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ redund (𝜃, 𝜓, 𝜒))
Theorem	refrelsredund4 39227	The naive version of the class of reflexive relations is redundant with respect to the class of reflexive relations (see dfrefrels2 39104) if the relations are symmetric as well. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ( I ↾ dom 𝑟) ⊆ 𝑟} Redund ⟨ RefRels , ( RefRels ∩ SymRels )⟩
Theorem	refrelsredund2 39228	The naive version of the class of reflexive relations is redundant with respect to the class of reflexive relations (see dfrefrels2 39104) in the class of equivalence relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ( I ↾ dom 𝑟) ⊆ 𝑟} Redund ⟨ RefRels , EqvRels ⟩
Theorem	refrelsredund3 39229*	The naive version of the class of reflexive relations {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑟𝑥𝑟𝑥} is redundant with respect to the class of reflexive relations (see dfrefrels3 39105) in the class of equivalence relations. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ {𝑟 ∈ Rels ∣ ∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑟 𝑥𝑟𝑥} Redund ⟨ RefRels , EqvRels ⟩
Theorem	refrelredund4 39230	The naive version of the definition of reflexive relation is redundant with respect to reflexive relation (see dfrefrel2 39106) if the relation is symmetric as well. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Oct-2022.)
⊢ redund ((( I ↾ dom 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ Rel 𝑅), RefRel 𝑅, ( RefRel 𝑅 ∧ SymRel 𝑅))
Theorem	refrelredund2 39231	The naive version of the definition of reflexive relation is redundant with respect to reflexive relation (see dfrefrel2 39106) in equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Oct-2022.)
⊢ redund ((( I ↾ dom 𝑅) ⊆ 𝑅 ∧ Rel 𝑅), RefRel 𝑅, EqvRel 𝑅)
Theorem	refrelredund3 39232*	The naive version of the definition of reflexive relation (∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅𝑥𝑅𝑥 ∧ Rel 𝑅) is redundant with respect to reflexive relation (see dfrefrel3 39107) in equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Oct-2022.)
⊢ redund ((∀𝑥 ∈ dom 𝑅 𝑥𝑅𝑥 ∧ Rel 𝑅), RefRel 𝑅, EqvRel 𝑅)
21.26.16  Domain quotients
Definition	df-dmqss 39233*	Define the class of domain quotients. Domain quotients are pairs of sets, typically a relation and a set, where the quotient (see df-qs 8688) of the relation on its domain is equal to the set. See comments of df-ers 39259 for the motivation for this definition. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 16-Apr-2019.)
⊢ DomainQss = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ (dom 𝑥 / 𝑥) = 𝑦}
Definition	df-dmqs 39234	Define the domain quotient predicate. (Read: the domain quotient of 𝑅 is 𝐴.) If 𝐴 and 𝑅 are sets, the domain quotient binary relation and the domain quotient predicate are the same, see brdmqssqs 39242. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 9-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 DomainQs 𝐴 ↔ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴)
Theorem	dmqseq 39235	Equality theorem for domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = (dom 𝑆 / 𝑆))
Theorem	dmqseqi 39236	Equality theorem for domain quotient, inference version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Sep-2021.)
⊢ 𝑅 = 𝑆    ⇒   ⊢ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = (dom 𝑆 / 𝑆)
Theorem	dmqseqd 39237	Equality theorem for domain quotient set, deduction version. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 = 𝑆)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = (dom 𝑆 / 𝑆))
Theorem	dmqseqeq1 39238	Equality theorem for domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 ↔ (dom 𝑆 / 𝑆) = 𝐴))
Theorem	dmqseqeq1i 39239	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 39240	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 39241	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 39242	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 39243	The empty set is not an element of a domain quotient. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 2-Mar-2018.)
⊢ ¬ ∅ ∈ (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅)
Theorem	qseq 39244*	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 39383), 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 39478. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Oct-2018.)
⊢ ((𝐵 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑢(𝑢 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝐵 𝑢 = [𝑣]𝑅))
Theorem	n0eldmqseq 39245	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 39246	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 39247	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 39248	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 39249	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 39250	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 39251	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 39252	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 39253	Lemma for erimeq2 39274. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (Rel 𝑅 → ((dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴 → (𝐵 ∈ ran 𝑅 ↔ 𝐵 ∈ ∪ 𝐴))))
Theorem	releldmqs 39254*	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 39255*	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 39256*	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 39257	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 39258	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)
21.26.17  Equivalence relations on domain quotients
Definition	df-ers 39259	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 8682 "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 39179, dfeqvrels2 39183, dfeqvrels3 39184 and df-eqvrel 39180, dfeqvrel2 39185, dfeqvrel3 39186 are fully transparent in this regard. However, they lack the domain component (dom 𝑅 = 𝐴) of the present df-er 8682. While we acknowledge the need of a domain component, the present df-er 8682 definition does not utilize the results revealed by the new theorems in the Partition-Equivalence Theorem part below (like pets 39477 and pet 39476). From those theorems follows that the natural domain of equivalence relations is not 𝑅Domain𝐴 (i.e. dom 𝑅 = 𝐴 see brdomaing 36296), but 𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴 (i.e. (dom 𝑅 / 𝑅) = 𝐴, see brdmqss 39241), see erimeq 39275 vs. prter3 39518. While I'm sure we need both equivalence relation df-eqvrels 39179 and equivalence relation on domain quotient df-ers 39259, 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 39179 and df-ers 39259 are enough and named the predicate version of the one on domain quotient as the alternate version df-erALTV 39260 of the present df-er 8682. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 26-Jun-2021.)
⊢ Ers = ( DomainQss ↾ EqvRels )
Definition	df-erALTV 39260	Equivalence relation with natural domain predicate, see also the comment of df-ers 39259. Alternate definition is dferALTV2 39264. 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 39273. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 12-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 ↔ ( EqvRel 𝑅 ∧ 𝑅 DomainQs 𝐴))
Definition	df-comembers 39261	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 39262	Define the comember equivalence relation on the class 𝐴 (or, the restricted coelement equivalence relation on its domain quotient 𝐴.) Alternate definitions are dfcomember2 39269 and dfcomember3 39270. 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 39263	Binary equivalence relation with natural domain, see the comment of df-ers 39259. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 23-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 Ers 𝐴 ↔ (𝑅 ∈ EqvRels ∧ 𝑅 DomainQss 𝐴)))
Theorem	dferALTV2 39264	Equivalence relation with natural domain predicate, see the comment of df-ers 39259. (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 39265	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 39266	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 39267	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 39268	Alternate definition of the comember equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 28-Nov-2022.)
⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ∼ 𝐴 ErALTV 𝐴)
Theorem	dfcomember2 39269	Alternate definition of the comember equivalence relation. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 25-Sep-2021.)
⊢ ( CoMembEr 𝐴 ↔ ( EqvRel ∼ 𝐴 ∧ (dom ∼ 𝐴 / ∼ 𝐴) = 𝐴))
Theorem	dfcomember3 39270	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 39271	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 39272	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 39273	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 39274	Equivalence relation on its natural domain implies that the class of coelements on the domain is equal to the relation (this is prter3 39518 in a more convenient form , see also erimeq 39275). (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 39275	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 39518 and erimeq2 39274). (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 7-Oct-2021.) (Revised by Peter Mazsa, 29-Dec-2021.)
⊢ (𝑅 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑅 ErALTV 𝐴 → ∼ 𝐴 = 𝑅))
21.26.18  Functions
Definition	df-funss 39276	Define the class of all function sets (but not necessarily function relations, cf. df-funsALTV 39277). It is used only by df-funsALTV 39277. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.)
⊢ Funss = {𝑥 ∣ ≀ 𝑥 ∈ CnvRefRels }
Definition	df-funsALTV 39277	Define the function relations class, i.e., the class of functions. Alternate definitions are dffunsALTV 39279, ... , dffunsALTV5 39283. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.)
⊢ FunsALTV = ( Funss ∩ Rels )
Definition	df-funALTV 39278	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 6527, are always the same, that is ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ Fun 𝐹), see funALTVfun 39294. 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 39293. Alternate definitions are dffunALTV2 39284, ... , dffunALTV5 39287. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.)
⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ ( CnvRefRel ≀ 𝐹 ∧ Rel 𝐹))
Theorem	dffunsALTV 39279	Alternate definition of the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 18-Jul-2021.)
⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ 𝑓 ∈ CnvRefRels }
Theorem	dffunsALTV2 39280	Alternate definition of the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 30-Aug-2021.)
⊢ FunsALTV = {𝑓 ∈ Rels ∣ ≀ 𝑓 ⊆ I }
Theorem	dffunsALTV3 39281*	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 39282*	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 39283*	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 39284	Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV2 39310. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 8-Feb-2018.)
⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ⊆ I ∧ Rel 𝐹))
Theorem	dffunALTV3 39285*	Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV3 39311. Reproduction of dffun2 6535. 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 39286*	Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV4 39312. This is dffun6 6536. 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 39287*	Alternate definition of the function relation predicate, cf. dfdisjALTV5 39313. (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 39288	Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 24-Jul-2021.)
⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ∈ CnvRefRels ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elfunsALTV2 39289	Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ ( ≀ 𝐹 ⊆ I ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elfunsALTV3 39290*	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 39291*	Elementhood in the class of functions. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 31-Aug-2021.)
⊢ (𝐹 ∈ FunsALTV ↔ (∀𝑢∃*𝑥 𝑢𝐹𝑥 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ Rels ))
Theorem	elfunsALTV5 39292*	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 39293	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 39294	Our definition of the function predicate df-funALTV 39278 (based on a more general, converse reflexive, relation) and the original definition of function in set.mm df-fun 6527, are always the same and interchangeable. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 27-Jul-2021.)
⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐹 ↔ Fun 𝐹)
Theorem	funALTVss 39295	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 39296	Equality theorem for function predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1994.)
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵))
Theorem	funALTVeqi 39297	Equality inference for the function predicate. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵)
Theorem	funALTVeqd 39298	Equality deduction for the function predicate. (Contributed by NM, 23-Feb-2013.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ( FunALTV 𝐴 ↔ FunALTV 𝐵))
21.26.19  Disjoints vs. converse functions
Definition	df-disjss 39299	Define the class of all disjoint sets (but not necessarily disjoint relations, cf. df-disjs 39300). It is used only by df-disjs 39300. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.)
⊢ Disjss = {𝑥 ∣ ≀ ◡𝑥 ∈ CnvRefRels }
Definition	df-disjs 39300	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 39309). 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 39335. Alternate definitions are dfdisjs 39304, ... , dfdisjs5 39308. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 17-Jul-2021.)
⊢ Disjs = ( Disjss ∩ Rels )