| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 395 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 | aecoms-o 39401 | A commutation rule for identical variable specifiers. Version of aecoms 2436 using ax-c11 39386. (Contributed by NM, 10-May-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | hbae-o 39402 | All variables are effectively bound in an identical variable specifier. Version of hbae 2439 using ax-c11 39386. (Contributed by NM, 13-May-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | dral1-o 39403 | Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. Part of Theorem 9.4 of [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of preprint). Version of dral1 2447 using ax-c11 39386. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-1994.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑦𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | ax12fromc15 39404 |
Rederivation of Axiom ax-12 2189 from ax-c15 39388, ax-c11 39386 (used through
dral1-o 39403), and other older axioms. See Theorem axc15 2430 for the
derivation of ax-c15 39388 from ax-12 2189.
An open problem is whether we can prove this using ax-c11n 39387 instead of ax-c11 39386. This proof uses newer axioms ax-4 1816 and ax-6 1974, but since these are proved from the older axioms above, this is acceptable and lets us avoid having to reprove several earlier theorems to use ax-c4 39383 and ax-c10 39385. (Contributed by NM, 22-Jan-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | ax13fromc9 39405 |
Derive ax-13 2380 from ax-c9 39389 and other older axioms.
This proof uses newer axioms ax-4 1816 and ax-6 1974, but since these are proved from the older axioms above, this is acceptable and lets us avoid having to reprove several earlier theorems to use ax-c4 39383 and ax-c10 39385. (Contributed by NM, 21-Dec-2015.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑦 = 𝑧 → ∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧)) | ||
These theorems were mostly intended to study properties of the older axiom schemes and are not useful outside of this section. They should not be used outside of this section. They may be deleted when they are deemed to no longer be of interest. | ||
| Theorem | ax5ALT 39406* |
Axiom to quantify a variable over a formula in which it does not occur.
Axiom C5 in [Megill] p. 444 (p. 11 of
the preprint). Also appears as
Axiom B6 (p. 75) of system S2 of [Tarski] p. 77 and Axiom C5-1 of
[Monk2] p. 113.
(This theorem simply repeats ax-5 1917 so that we can include the following note, which applies only to the obsolete axiomatization.) This axiom is logically redundant in the (logically complete) predicate calculus axiom system consisting of ax-gen 1802, ax-c4 39383, ax-c5 39382, ax-11 2168, ax-c7 39384, ax-7 2015, ax-c9 39389, ax-c10 39385, ax-c11 39386, ax-8 2121, ax-9 2129, ax-c14 39390, ax-c15 39388, and ax-c16 39391: in that system, we can derive any instance of ax-5 1917 not containing wff variables by induction on formula length, using ax5eq 39431 and ax5el 39436 for the basis together with hbn 2306, hbal 2178, and hbim 2310. However, if we omit this axiom, our development would be quite inconvenient since we could work only with specific instances of wffs containing no wff variables - this axiom introduces the concept of a setvar variable not occurring in a wff (as opposed to just two setvar variables being distinct). (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-2017.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | sps-o 39407 | Generalization of antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 5-Jan-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | hbequid 39408 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for 𝑥 = 𝑥. This theorem tells us that any variable, including 𝑥, is effectively not free in 𝑥 = 𝑥, even though 𝑥 is technically free according to the traditional definition of free variable. (The proof does not use ax-c10 39385.) (Contributed by NM, 13-Jan-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Mar-2014.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑥 → ∀𝑦 𝑥 = 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | nfequid-o 39409 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for 𝑥 = 𝑥. This theorem tells us that any variable, including 𝑥, is effectively not free in 𝑥 = 𝑥, even though 𝑥 is technically free according to the traditional definition of free variable. (The proof uses only ax-4 1816, ax-7 2015, ax-c9 39389, and ax-gen 1802. This shows that this can be proved without ax6 2392, even though Theorem equid 2019 cannot. A shorter proof using ax6 2392 is obtainable from equid 2019 and hbth 1810.) Remark added 2-Dec-2015 NM: This proof does implicitly use ax6v 1975, which is used for the derivation of axc9 2390, unless we consider ax-c9 39389 the starting axiom rather than ax-13 2380. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jan-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 12-Oct-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦 𝑥 = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | axc5c7 39410 | Proof of a single axiom that can replace ax-c5 39382 and ax-c7 39384. See axc5c7toc5 39411 and axc5c7toc7 39412 for the rederivation of those axioms. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 12-Sep-2005.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | axc5c7toc5 39411 | Rederivation of ax-c5 39382 from axc5c7 39410. Only propositional calculus is used for the rederivation. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 12-Sep-2005.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | axc5c7toc7 39412 | Rederivation of ax-c7 39384 from axc5c7 39410. Only propositional calculus is used for the rederivation. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 12-Sep-2005.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | axc711 39413 | Proof of a single axiom that can replace both ax-c7 39384 and ax-11 2168. See axc711toc7 39415 and axc711to11 39416 for the rederivation of those axioms. (Contributed by NM, 18-Nov-2006.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | nfa1-o 39414 | 𝑥 is not free in ∀𝑥𝜑. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Aug-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥∀𝑥𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | axc711toc7 39415 | Rederivation of ax-c7 39384 from axc711 39413. Note that ax-c7 39384 and ax-11 2168 are not used by the rederivation. (Contributed by NM, 18-Nov-2006.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | axc711to11 39416 | Rederivation of ax-11 2168 from axc711 39413. Note that ax-c7 39384 and ax-11 2168 are not used by the rederivation. (Contributed by NM, 18-Nov-2006.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | axc5c711 39417 | Proof of a single axiom that can replace ax-c5 39382, ax-c7 39384, and ax-11 2168 in a subsystem that includes these axioms plus ax-c4 39383 and ax-gen 1802 (and propositional calculus). See axc5c711toc5 39418, axc5c711toc7 39419, and axc5c711to11 39420 for the rederivation of those axioms. This theorem extends the idea in Scott Fenton's axc5c7 39410. (Contributed by NM, 18-Nov-2006.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ ∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | axc5c711toc5 39418 | Rederivation of ax-c5 39382 from axc5c711 39417. Only propositional calculus is used by the rederivation. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2006.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | axc5c711toc7 39419 | Rederivation of ax-c7 39384 from axc5c711 39417. Note that ax-c7 39384 and ax-11 2168 are not used by the rederivation. The use of alimi 1818 (which uses ax-c5 39382) is allowed since we have already proved axc5c711toc5 39418. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2006.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ ∀𝑥𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | axc5c711to11 39420 | Rederivation of ax-11 2168 from axc5c711 39417. Note that ax-c7 39384 and ax-11 2168 are not used by the rederivation. The use of alimi 1818 (which uses ax-c5 39382) is allowed since we have already proved axc5c711toc5 39418. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2006.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦𝜑 → ∀𝑦∀𝑥𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | equidqe 39421 | equid 2019 with existential quantifier without using ax-c5 39382 or ax-5 1917. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jan-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Feb-2014.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | axc5sp1 39422 | A special case of ax-c5 39382 without using ax-c5 39382 or ax-5 1917. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jan-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑥 → ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | equidq 39423 | equid 2019 with universal quantifier without using ax-c5 39382 or ax-5 1917. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jan-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ∀𝑦 𝑥 = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | equid1ALT 39424 | Alternate proof of equid 2019 and equid1 39398 from older axioms ax-c7 39384, ax-c10 39385 and ax-c9 39389. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝑥 = 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | axc11nfromc11 39425 |
Rederivation of ax-c11n 39387 from original version ax-c11 39386. See Theorem
axc11 2438 for the derivation of ax-c11 39386 from ax-c11n 39387.
This theorem should not be referenced in any proof. Instead, use ax-c11n 39387 above so that uses of ax-c11n 39387 can be more easily identified, or use aecom-o 39400 when this form is needed for studies involving ax-c11 39386 and omitting ax-5 1917. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | naecoms-o 39426 | A commutation rule for distinct variable specifiers. Version of naecoms 2437 using ax-c11 39386. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑥 → 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | hbnae-o 39427 | All variables are effectively bound in a distinct variable specifier. Lemma L19 in [Megill] p. 446 (p. 14 of the preprint). Version of hbnae 2440 using ax-c11 39386. (Contributed by NM, 13-May-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | dvelimf-o 39428 | Proof of dvelimh 2458 that uses ax-c11 39386 but not ax-c15 39388, ax-c11n 39387, or ax-12 2189. Version of dvelimh 2458 using ax-c11 39386 instead of axc11 2438. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2002.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜓 → ∀𝑧𝜓) & ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | dral2-o 39429 | Formula-building lemma for use with the Distinctor Reduction Theorem. Part of Theorem 9.4 of [Megill] p. 448 (p. 16 of preprint). Version of dral2 2446 using ax-c11 39386. (Contributed by NM, 27-Feb-2005.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑧𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑧𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | aev-o 39430* | A "distinctor elimination" lemma with no disjoint variable conditions on variables in the consequent, proved without using ax-c16 39391. Version of aev 2066 using ax-c11 39386. (Contributed by NM, 8-Nov-2006.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 21-Jun-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 𝑤 = 𝑣) | ||
| Theorem | ax5eq 39431* | Theorem to add distinct quantifier to atomic formula. (This theorem demonstrates the induction basis for ax-5 1917 considered as a metatheorem. Do not use it for later proofs - use ax-5 1917 instead, to avoid reference to the redundant axiom ax-c16 39391.) (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 𝑥 = 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | dveeq2-o 39432* | Quantifier introduction when one pair of variables is distinct. Version of dveeq2 2386 using ax-c15 39388. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 𝑧 = 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | axc16g-o 39433* | A generalization of Axiom ax-c16 39391. Version of axc16g 2272 using ax-c11 39386. (Contributed by NM, 15-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-May-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑧𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | dveeq1-o 39434* | Quantifier introduction when one pair of variables is distinct. Version of dveeq1 2388 using ax-c11 . (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2002.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑦 = 𝑧 → ∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | dveeq1-o16 39435* | Version of dveeq1 2388 using ax-c16 39391 instead of ax-5 1917. (Contributed by NM, 29-Apr-2008.) TODO: Recover proof from older set.mm to remove use of ax-5 1917. (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑦 = 𝑧 → ∀𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑧)) | ||
| Theorem | ax5el 39436* | Theorem to add distinct quantifier to atomic formula. This theorem demonstrates the induction basis for ax-5 1917 considered as a metatheorem.) (Contributed by NM, 22-Jun-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∀𝑧 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦) | ||
| Theorem | axc11n-16 39437* | This theorem shows that, given ax-c16 39391, we can derive a version of ax-c11n 39387. However, it is weaker than ax-c11n 39387 because it has a distinct variable requirement. (Contributed by Andrew Salmon, 27-Jul-2011.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑧 → ∀𝑧 𝑧 = 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | dveel2ALT 39438* | Alternate proof of dveel2 2470 using ax-c16 39391 instead of ax-5 1917. (Contributed by NM, 10-May-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 → ∀𝑥 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | ax12f 39439 | Basis step for constructing a substitution instance of ax-c15 39388 without using ax-c15 39388. We can start with any formula 𝜑 in which 𝑥 is not free. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12eq 39440 | Basis step for constructing a substitution instance of ax-c15 39388 without using ax-c15 39388. Atomic formula for equality predicate. (Contributed by NM, 22-Jan-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 = 𝑤 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 = 𝑤)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12el 39441 | Basis step for constructing a substitution instance of ax-c15 39388 without using ax-c15 39388. Atomic formula for membership predicate. (Contributed by NM, 22-Jan-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑧 ∈ 𝑤 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑤)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12indn 39442 | Induction step for constructing a substitution instance of ax-c15 39388 without using ax-c15 39388. Negation case. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ¬ 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12indi 39443 | Induction step for constructing a substitution instance of ax-c15 39388 without using ax-c15 39388. Implication case. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) & ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜓 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜓)))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12indalem 39444 | Lemma for ax12inda2 39446 and ax12inda 39447. (Contributed by NM, 24-Jan-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑦 𝑦 = 𝑧 → (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑧𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧𝜑))))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12inda2ALT 39445* | Alternate proof of ax12inda2 39446, slightly more direct and not requiring ax-c16 39391. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑧𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12inda2 39446* | Induction step for constructing a substitution instance of ax-c15 39388 without using ax-c15 39388. Quantification case. When 𝑧 and 𝑦 are distinct, this theorem avoids the dummy variables needed by the more general ax12inda 39447. (Contributed by NM, 24-Jan-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑧𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12inda 39447* | Induction step for constructing a substitution instance of ax-c15 39388 without using ax-c15 39388. Quantification case. (When 𝑧 and 𝑦 are distinct, ax12inda2 39446 may be used instead to avoid the dummy variable 𝑤 in the proof.) (Contributed by NM, 24-Jan-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑤 → (𝑥 = 𝑤 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑤 → 𝜑)))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑧𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → ∀𝑧𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12v2-o 39448* | Rederivation of ax-c15 39388 from ax12v 2190 (without using ax-c15 39388 or the full ax-12 2189). Thus, the hypothesis (ax12v 2190) provides an alternate axiom that can be used in place of ax-c15 39388. See also axc15 2430. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑧 → 𝜑))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | ax12a2-o 39449* | Derive ax-c15 39388 from a hypothesis in the form of ax-12 2189, without using ax-12 2189 or ax-c15 39388. The hypothesis is weaker than ax-12 2189, with 𝑧 both distinct from 𝑥 and not occurring in 𝜑. Thus, the hypothesis provides an alternate axiom that can be used in place of ax-12 2189, if we also have ax-c11 39386, which this proof uses. As Theorem ax12 2431 shows, the distinct variable conditions are optional. An open problem is whether we can derive this with ax-c11n 39387 instead of ax-c11 39386. (Contributed by NM, 2-Feb-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (∀𝑧𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑧 → 𝜑))) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 → ∀𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)))) | ||
| Theorem | axc11-o 39450 |
Show that ax-c11 39386 can be derived from ax-c11n 39387 and ax-12 2189. An open
problem is whether this theorem can be derived from ax-c11n 39387 and the
others when ax-12 2189 is replaced with ax-c15 39388 or ax12v 2190. See Theorems
axc11nfromc11 39425 for the rederivation of ax-c11n 39387 from axc11 2438.
Normally, axc11 2438 should be used rather than ax-c11 39386 or axc11-o 39450, except by theorems specifically studying the latter's properties. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∀𝑥𝜑 → ∀𝑦𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | fsumshftd 39451* | Index shift of a finite sum with a weaker "implicit substitution" hypothesis than fsumshft 15740. The proof demonstrates how this can be derived starting from from fsumshft 15740. (Contributed by NM, 1-Nov-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐾 ∈ ℤ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ℤ) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℤ) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑗 ∈ (𝑀...𝑁)) → 𝐴 ∈ ℂ) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑗 = (𝑘 − 𝐾)) → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Σ𝑗 ∈ (𝑀...𝑁)𝐴 = Σ𝑘 ∈ ((𝑀 + 𝐾)...(𝑁 + 𝐾))𝐵) | ||
| Axiom | ax-riotaBAD 39452 | Define restricted description binder. In case it doesn't exist, we return a set which is not a member of the domain of discourse 𝐴. See also comments for df-iota 6448. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) WARNING: THIS "AXIOM", WHICH IS THE OLD df-riota 7320, CONFLICTS WITH (THE NEW) df-riota 7320 AND MAKES THE SYSTEM IN set.mm INCONSISTENT. IT IS TEMPORARY AND WILL BE DELETED AFTER ALL USES ARE ELIMINATED. |
| ⊢ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) = if(∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑, (℩𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)), (Undef‘{𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴})) | ||
| Theorem | riotaclbgBAD 39453* | Closure of restricted iota. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | riotaclbBAD 39454* | Closure of restricted iota. (Contributed by NM, 15-Sep-2011.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | riotasvd 39455* | Deduction version of riotasv 39458. (Contributed by NM, 4-Mar-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜓 → 𝑥 = 𝐶))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → ((𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝐷 = 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | riotasv2d 39456* | Value of description binder 𝐷 for a single-valued class expression 𝐶(𝑦) (as in e.g. reusv2 5339). Special case of riota2f 7344. (Contributed by NM, 2-Mar-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝐹) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜓 → 𝑥 = 𝐶))) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐸) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐸) → 𝐶 = 𝐹) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐸 ∈ 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → 𝐷 = 𝐹) | ||
| Theorem | riotasv2s 39457* | The value of description binder 𝐷 for a single-valued class expression 𝐶(𝑦) (as in e.g. reusv2 5339) in the form of a substitution instance. Special case of riota2f 7344. (Contributed by NM, 3-Mar-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2016.) |
| ⊢ 𝐷 = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝐶)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ (𝐸 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ [𝐸 / 𝑦]𝜑)) → 𝐷 = ⦋𝐸 / 𝑦⦌𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | riotasv 39458* | Value of description binder 𝐷 for a single-valued class expression 𝐶(𝑦) (as in e.g. reusv2 5339). Special case of riota2f 7344. (Contributed by NM, 26-Jan-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2016.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐷 = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜑 → 𝑥 = 𝐶)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐷 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝐷 = 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | riotasv3d 39459* | A property 𝜒 holding for a representative of a single-valued class expression 𝐶(𝑦) (see e.g. reusv2 5339) also holds for its description binder 𝐷 (in the form of property 𝜃). (Contributed by NM, 5-Mar-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-Oct-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑦𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝜓 → 𝑥 = 𝐶))) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐶 = 𝐷) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | elimhyps 39460 | A version of elimhyp 4527 using explicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ [𝐵 / 𝑥]𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ [if(𝜑, 𝑥, 𝐵) / 𝑥]𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | dedths 39461 | A version of weak deduction theorem dedth 4520 using explicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ [if(𝜑, 𝑥, 𝐵) / 𝑥]𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | renegclALT 39462 | Closure law for negative of reals. Demonstrates use of weak deduction theorem with explicit substitution. The proof is much longer than that of renegcl 11455. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jun-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ℝ → -𝐴 ∈ ℝ) | ||
| Theorem | elimhyps2 39463 | Generalization of elimhyps 39460 that is not useful unless we can separately prove ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ [𝐵 / 𝑥]𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ [if([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) / 𝑥]𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | dedths2 39464 | Generalization of dedths 39461 that is not useful unless we can separately prove ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jun-2019.) |
| ⊢ [if([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑, 𝐴, 𝐵) / 𝑥]𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 → [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | nfcxfrdf 39465 | A utility lemma to transfer a bound-variable hypothesis builder into a definition. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2020.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | nfded 39466 | A deduction theorem that converts a not-free inference directly to deduction form. The first hypothesis is the hypothesis of the deduction form. The second is an equality deduction (e.g., (Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 → ∪ {𝑦 ∣ ∀𝑥𝑦 ∈ 𝐴} = ∪ 𝐴)) that starts from abidnf 3650. The last is assigned to the inference form (e.g., Ⅎ𝑥∪ {𝑦 ∣ ∀𝑥𝑦 ∈ 𝐴}) whose hypothesis is satisfied using nfaba1 2910. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) & ⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | nfded2 39467 | A deduction theorem that converts a not-free inference directly to deduction form. The first 2 hypotheses are the hypotheses of the deduction form. The third is an equality deduction (e.g., ((Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 ∧ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵) → 〈{𝑦 ∣ ∀𝑥𝑦 ∈ 𝐴}, {𝑦 ∣ ∀𝑥𝑦 ∈ 𝐵}〉 = 〈𝐴, 𝐵〉) for nfopd 4828) that starts from abidnf 3650. The last is assigned to the inference form (e.g., Ⅎ𝑥〈{𝑦 ∣ ∀𝑥𝑦 ∈ 𝐴}, {𝑦 ∣ ∀𝑥𝑦 ∈ 𝐵}〉 for nfop 4827) whose hypotheses are satisfied using nfaba1 2910. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐵) & ⊢ ((Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 ∧ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵) → 𝐶 = 𝐷) & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐶 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | nfunidALT2 39468 | Deduction version of nfuni 4852. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∪ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | nfunidALT 39469 | Deduction version of nfuni 4852. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥∪ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | nfopdALT 39470 | Deduction version of bound-variable hypothesis builder nfop 4827. This shows how the deduction version of a not-free theorem such as nfop 4827 can be created from the corresponding not-free inference theorem. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥〈𝐴, 𝐵〉) | ||
| Theorem | cnaddcom 39471 | Recover the commutative law of addition for complex numbers from the Abelian group structure. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℂ) → (𝐴 + 𝐵) = (𝐵 + 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | toycom 39472* | Show the commutative law for an operation 𝑂 on a toy structure class 𝐶 of commutative operations on ℂ. This illustrates how a structure class can be partially specialized. In practice, we would ordinarily define a new constant such as "CAbel" in place of 𝐶. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝑔 ∈ Abel ∣ (Base‘𝑔) = ℂ} & ⊢ + = (+g‘𝐾) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐾 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℂ) → (𝐴 + 𝐵) = (𝐵 + 𝐴)) | ||
| Syntax | clsa 39473 | Extend class notation with all 1-dim subspaces (atoms) of a left module or left vector space. |
| class LSAtoms | ||
| Syntax | clsh 39474 | Extend class notation with all subspaces of a left module or left vector space that are hyperplanes. |
| class LSHyp | ||
| Definition | df-lsatoms 39475* | Define the set of all 1-dim subspaces (atoms) of a left module or left vector space. (Contributed by NM, 9-Apr-2014.) |
| ⊢ LSAtoms = (𝑤 ∈ V ↦ ran (𝑣 ∈ ((Base‘𝑤) ∖ {(0g‘𝑤)}) ↦ ((LSpan‘𝑤)‘{𝑣}))) | ||
| Definition | df-lshyp 39476* | Define the set of all hyperplanes of a left module or left vector space. Also called co-atoms, these are subspaces that are one dimension less than the full space. (Contributed by NM, 29-Jun-2014.) |
| ⊢ LSHyp = (𝑤 ∈ V ↦ {𝑠 ∈ (LSubSp‘𝑤) ∣ (𝑠 ≠ (Base‘𝑤) ∧ ∃𝑣 ∈ (Base‘𝑤)((LSpan‘𝑤)‘(𝑠 ∪ {𝑣})) = (Base‘𝑤))}) | ||
| Theorem | lshpset 39477* | The set of all hyperplanes of a left module or left vector space. The vector 𝑣 is called a generating vector for the hyperplane. (Contributed by NM, 29-Jun-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑆 = (LSubSp‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑊 ∈ 𝑋 → 𝐻 = {𝑠 ∈ 𝑆 ∣ (𝑠 ≠ 𝑉 ∧ ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑉 (𝑁‘(𝑠 ∪ {𝑣})) = 𝑉)}) | ||
| Theorem | islshp 39478* | The predicate "is a hyperplane" (of a left module or left vector space). (Contributed by NM, 29-Jun-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑆 = (LSubSp‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑊 ∈ 𝑋 → (𝑈 ∈ 𝐻 ↔ (𝑈 ∈ 𝑆 ∧ 𝑈 ≠ 𝑉 ∧ ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑉 (𝑁‘(𝑈 ∪ {𝑣})) = 𝑉))) | ||
| Theorem | islshpsm 39479* | Hyperplane properties expressed with subspace sum. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jul-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑆 = (LSubSp‘𝑊) & ⊢ ⊕ = (LSSum‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑈 ∈ 𝐻 ↔ (𝑈 ∈ 𝑆 ∧ 𝑈 ≠ 𝑉 ∧ ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑉 (𝑈 ⊕ (𝑁‘{𝑣})) = 𝑉))) | ||
| Theorem | lshplss 39480 | A hyperplane is a subspace. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jul-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑆 = (LSubSp‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐻) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆) | ||
| Theorem | lshpne 39481 | A hyperplane is not equal to the vector space. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐻) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ≠ 𝑉) | ||
| Theorem | lshpnel 39482 | A hyperplane's generating vector does not belong to the hyperplane. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jul-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ ⊕ = (LSSum‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐻) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑈 ⊕ (𝑁‘{𝑋})) = 𝑉) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝑋 ∈ 𝑈) | ||
| Theorem | lshpnelb 39483 | The subspace sum of a hyperplane and the span of an element equals the vector space iff the element is not in the hyperplane. (Contributed by NM, 2-Oct-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ ⊕ = (LSSum‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LVec) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐻) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝑋 ∈ 𝑈 ↔ (𝑈 ⊕ (𝑁‘{𝑋})) = 𝑉)) | ||
| Theorem | lshpnel2N 39484 | Condition that determines a hyperplane. (Contributed by NM, 3-Oct-2014.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑆 = (LSubSp‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ ⊕ = (LSSum‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LVec) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ≠ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝑋 ∈ 𝑈) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑈 ∈ 𝐻 ↔ (𝑈 ⊕ (𝑁‘{𝑋})) = 𝑉)) | ||
| Theorem | lshpne0 39485 | The member of the span in the hyperplane definition does not belong to the hyperplane. (Contributed by NM, 14-Jul-2014.) (Proof shortened by AV, 19-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ ⊕ = (LSSum‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐻) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑈 ⊕ (𝑁‘{𝑋})) = 𝑉) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ≠ 0 ) | ||
| Theorem | lshpdisj 39486 | A hyperplane and the span in the hyperplane definition are disjoint. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jul-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ ⊕ = (LSSum‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LVec) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐻) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑈 ⊕ (𝑁‘{𝑋})) = 𝑉) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑈 ∩ (𝑁‘{𝑋})) = { 0 }) | ||
| Theorem | lshpcmp 39487 | If two hyperplanes are comparable, they are equal. (Contributed by NM, 9-Oct-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LVec) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝐻) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐻) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑇 ⊆ 𝑈 ↔ 𝑇 = 𝑈)) | ||
| Theorem | lshpinN 39488 | The intersection of two different hyperplanes is not a hyperplane. (Contributed by NM, 29-Oct-2014.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐻 = (LSHyp‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LVec) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 ∈ 𝐻) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐻) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝑇 ∩ 𝑈) ∈ 𝐻 ↔ 𝑇 = 𝑈)) | ||
| Theorem | lsatset 39489* | The set of all 1-dim subspaces (atoms) of a left module or left vector space. (Contributed by NM, 9-Apr-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 22-Sep-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑊 ∈ 𝑋 → 𝐴 = ran (𝑣 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ { 0 }) ↦ (𝑁‘{𝑣}))) | ||
| Theorem | islsat 39490* | The predicate "is a 1-dim subspace (atom)" (of a left module or left vector space). (Contributed by NM, 9-Apr-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑊 ∈ 𝑋 → (𝑈 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑥 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ { 0 })𝑈 = (𝑁‘{𝑥}))) | ||
| Theorem | lsatlspsn2 39491 | The span of a nonzero singleton is an atom. TODO: make this obsolete and use lsatlspsn 39492 instead? (Contributed by NM, 9-Apr-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑊 ∈ LMod ∧ 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑋 ≠ 0 ) → (𝑁‘{𝑋}) ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | lsatlspsn 39492 | The span of a nonzero singleton is an atom. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jan-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ (𝑉 ∖ { 0 })) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑁‘{𝑋}) ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | islsati 39493* | A 1-dim subspace (atom) (of a left module or left vector space) equals the span of some vector. (Contributed by NM, 1-Oct-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑊 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝑈 ∈ 𝐴) → ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑉 𝑈 = (𝑁‘{𝑣})) | ||
| Theorem | lsateln0 39494* | A 1-dim subspace (atom) (of a left module or left vector space) contains a nonzero vector. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-2015.) |
| ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑣 ∈ 𝑈 𝑣 ≠ 0 ) | ||
| Theorem | lsatlss 39495 | The set of 1-dim subspaces is a set of subspaces. (Contributed by NM, 9-Apr-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑆 = (LSubSp‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑊 ∈ LMod → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝑆) | ||
| Theorem | lsatlssel 39496 | An atom is a subspace. (Contributed by NM, 25-Aug-2014.) |
| ⊢ 𝑆 = (LSubSp‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝑆) | ||
| Theorem | lsatssv 39497 | An atom is a set of vectors. (Contributed by NM, 27-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑄 ∈ 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑄 ⊆ 𝑉) | ||
| Theorem | lsatn0 39498 | A 1-dim subspace (atom) of a left module or left vector space is nonzero. (atne0 32441 analog.) (Contributed by NM, 25-Aug-2014.) |
| ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ∈ 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑈 ≠ { 0 }) | ||
| Theorem | lsatspn0 39499 | The span of a vector is an atom iff the vector is nonzero. (Contributed by NM, 4-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝑁‘{𝑋}) ∈ 𝐴 ↔ 𝑋 ≠ 0 )) | ||
| Theorem | lsator0sp 39500 | The span of a vector is either an atom or the zero subspace. (Contributed by NM, 15-Mar-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝑉 = (Base‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝑁 = (LSpan‘𝑊) & ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝑊) & ⊢ 𝐴 = (LSAtoms‘𝑊) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ LMod) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝑁‘{𝑋}) ∈ 𝐴 ∨ (𝑁‘{𝑋}) = { 0 })) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |