| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 4 of 509) | < 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: | (1-31400) |
(31401-32923) |
(32924-50825) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | 3bitrri 301 | A chained inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr2i 302 | A chained inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr2ri 303 | A chained inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr3i 304 | A chained inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr3ri 305 | A chained inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr4i 306 | A chained inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. This inference is frequently used to apply a definition to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr4ri 307 | A chained inference from transitive law for logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 2-Sep-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitrd 308 | Deduction from transitivity of biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1999.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜏)) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitrrd 309 | Deduction from transitivity of biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr2d 310 | Deduction from transitivity of biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜏)) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr2rd 311 | Deduction from transitivity of biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr3d 312 | Deduction from transitivity of biconditional. Useful for converting conditional definitions in a formula. (Contributed by NM, 24-Apr-1996.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr3rd 313 | Deduction from transitivity of biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr4d 314 | Deduction from transitivity of biconditional. Useful for converting conditional definitions in a formula. (Contributed by NM, 18-Oct-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr4rd 315 | Deduction from transitivity of biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 4-Aug-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr3g 316 | More general version of 3bitr3i 304. Useful for converting definitions in a formula. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜏) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) | ||
| Theorem | 3bitr4g 317 | More general version of 3bitr4i 306. Useful for converting definitions in a formula. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) | ||
| Theorem | notnotb 318 | Double negation. Theorem *4.13 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | con34b 319 | A biconditional form of contraposition. Theorem *4.1 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 116. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜓 → ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | con4bid 320 | A contraposition deduction. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 ↔ ¬ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | notbid 321 | Deduction negating both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 ↔ ¬ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | notbi 322 | Contraposition. Theorem *4.11 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Jun-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | notbii 323 | Negate both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-May-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | con4bii 324 | A contraposition inference. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | mtbi 325 | An inference from a biconditional, related to modus tollens. (Contributed by NM, 15-Nov-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 25-Oct-2012.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ¬ 𝜓 | ||
| Theorem | mtbir 326 | An inference from a biconditional, related to modus tollens. (Contributed by NM, 15-Nov-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Oct-2012.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜓 & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | mtbid 327 | A deduction from a biconditional, similar to modus tollens. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | mtbird 328 | A deduction from a biconditional, similar to modus tollens. (Contributed by NM, 10-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | mtbii 329 | An inference from a biconditional, similar to modus tollens. (Contributed by NM, 27-Nov-1995.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜓 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | mtbiri 330 | An inference from a biconditional, similar to modus tollens. (Contributed by NM, 24-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜒 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | sylnib 331 | A mixed syllogism inference from an implication and a biconditional. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | sylnibr 332 | A mixed syllogism inference from an implication and a biconditional. Useful for substituting a consequent with a definition. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | sylnbi 333 | A mixed syllogism inference from a biconditional and an implication. Useful for substituting an antecedent with a definition. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | sylnbir 334 | A mixed syllogism inference from a biconditional and an implication. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | xchnxbi 335 | Replacement of a subexpression by an equivalent one. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Sep-2014.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | xchnxbir 336 | Replacement of a subexpression by an equivalent one. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Sep-2014.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | xchbinx 337 | Replacement of a subexpression by an equivalent one. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Sep-2014.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | xchbinxr 338 | Replacement of a subexpression by an equivalent one. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 27-Sep-2014.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | imbi2i 339 | Introduce an antecedent to both sides of a logical equivalence. This and the next three rules are useful for building up wff's around a definition, in order to make use of the definition. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 6-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜒 → 𝜑) ↔ (𝜒 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bibi2i 340 | Inference adding a biconditional to the left in an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 7-May-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 16-May-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ↔ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bibi1i 341 | Inference adding a biconditional to the right in an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | bibi12i 342 | The equivalence of two equivalences. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | imbi2d 343 | Deduction adding an antecedent to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜃 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜃 → 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | imbi1d 344 | Deduction adding a consequent to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 17-Sep-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 → 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | bibi2d 345 | Deduction adding a biconditional to the left in an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-May-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜃 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | bibi1d 346 | Deduction adding a biconditional to the right in an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ↔ 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | imbi12d 347 | Deduction joining two equivalences to form equivalence of implications. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 → 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | bibi12d 348 | Deduction joining two equivalences to form equivalence of biconditionals. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜏)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ↔ 𝜃) ↔ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜏))) | ||
| Theorem | imbi12 349 | Closed form of imbi12i 353. Was automatically derived from its "Virtual Deduction" version and the Metamath program "MM-PA> MINIMIZE_WITH *" command. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 18-Mar-2012.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ((𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) → ((𝜑 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜃)))) | ||
| Theorem | imbi1 350 | Theorem *4.84 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | imbi2 351 | Theorem *4.85 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-May-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ((𝜒 → 𝜑) ↔ (𝜒 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | imbi1i 352 | Introduce a consequent to both sides of a logical equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 17-Sep-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | imbi12i 353 | Join two logical equivalences to form equivalence of implications. (Contributed by NM, 1-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | bibi1 354 | Theorem *4.86 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | bitr3 355 | Closed nested implication form of bitr3i 280. Derived automatically from bitr3VD 45673. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 31-Dec-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | con2bi 356 | Contraposition. Theorem *4.12 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 15-Apr-1995.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 ↔ ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | con2bid 357 | A contraposition deduction. (Contributed by NM, 15-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ ¬ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | con1bid 358 | A contraposition deduction. (Contributed by NM, 9-Oct-1999.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | con1bii 359 | A contraposition inference. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Oct-2012.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | con2bii 360 | A contraposition inference. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | con1b 361 | Contraposition. Bidirectional version of con1 147. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | con2b 362 | Contraposition. Bidirectional version of con2 136. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1993.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 → ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | biimt 363 | A wff is equivalent to itself with true antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 28-Jan-1996.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 → 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.5 364 | Theorem *5.5 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | a1bi 365 | Inference introducing a theorem as an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 11-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | mt2bi 366 | A false consequent falsifies an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 ↔ (𝜓 → ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | mtt 367 | Modus-tollens-like theorem. (Contributed by NM, 7-Apr-2001.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Nov-2012.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | imnot 368 | If a proposition is false, then implying it is equivalent to being false. One of four theorems that can be used to simplify an implication (𝜑 → 𝜓), the other ones being ax-1 6 (true consequent), pm2.21 124 (false antecedent), pm5.5 364 (true antecedent). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 26-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.501 369 | Theorem *5.501 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | ibib 370 | Implication in terms of implication and biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 31-Mar-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 24-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | ibibr 371 | Implication in terms of implication and biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 29-Apr-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | tbt 372 | A wff is equivalent to its equivalence with a truth. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 13-May-2011.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nbn2 373 | The negation of a wff is equivalent to the wff's equivalence to falsehood. (Contributed by Juha Arpiainen, 19-Jan-2006.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 ↔ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | bibif 374 | Transfer negation via an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 3-Oct-2007.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 28-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nbn 375 | The negation of a wff is equivalent to the wff's equivalence to falsehood. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2013.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 ↔ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | nbn3 376 | Transfer falsehood via equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 ↔ (𝜓 ↔ ¬ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.21im 377 | Two propositions are equivalent if they are both false. Closed form of 2false 378. Equivalent to a biimpr 223-like version of the xor-connective. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 13-May-2013.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))) | ||
| Theorem | 2false 378 | Two falsehoods are equivalent. (Contributed by NM, 4-Apr-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-May-2013.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 & ⊢ ¬ 𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | 2falsed 379 | Two falsehoods are equivalent (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2013.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 11-Apr-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.21ni 380 | Two propositions implying a false one are equivalent. (Contributed by NM, 16-Feb-1996.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-May-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.21nii 381 | Eliminate an antecedent implied by each side of a biconditional. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1999.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.21ndd 382 | Eliminate an antecedent implied by each side of a biconditional, deduction version. (Contributed by Paul Chapman, 21-Nov-2012.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 6-Oct-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 → 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃)) | ||
| Theorem | bija 383 | Combine antecedents into a single biconditional. This inference, reminiscent of ja 188, is reversible: The hypotheses can be deduced from the conclusion alone (see pm5.1im 266 and pm5.21im 377). (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 13-May-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) & ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.18 384 | Theorem *5.18 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. This theorem says that logical equivalence is the same as negated "exclusive or". (Contributed by NM, 28-Jun-2002.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 20-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 15-Oct-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | xor3 385 | Two ways to express "exclusive or". (Contributed by NM, 1-Jan-2006.) |
| ⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | nbbn 386 | Move negation outside of biconditional. Compare Theorem *5.18 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 27-Jun-2002.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 20-Sep-2013.) (Proof shortened by Umit Teoman Dogan, 10-Jun-2026.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | nbbnOLD 387 | Obsolete version of nbbn 386 as of 10-Jun-2026. (Contributed by NM, 27-Jun-2002.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | biass 388 | Associative law for the biconditional. An axiom of system DS in Vladimir Lifschitz, "On calculational proofs", Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 113:207-224, 2002, http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/ai-lab/pub-view.php?PubID=26805. Interestingly, this law was not included in Principia Mathematica but was apparently first noted by Jan Lukasiewicz circa 1923. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Juha Arpiainen, 19-Jan-2006.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Sep-2013.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | birot 389 | Rotation of the arguments of the nested implication (. ↔ (. ↔ .)) (a general phenomenon for a commutative associative binary operation, see e.g., inrot 4181) . (Contributed by BJ, 10-Aug-2026.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | biluk 390 | Lukasiewicz's shortest axiom for equivalential calculus. Storrs McCall, ed., Polish Logic 1920-1939 (Oxford, 1967), p. 96. (Contributed by NM, 10-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.19 391 | Theorem *5.19 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ¬ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bi2.04 392 | Logical equivalence of commuted antecedents. Part of Theorem *4.87 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 11-May-1993.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.4 393 | Antecedent absorption implication. Theorem *5.4 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) ↔ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | imdi 394 | Distributive law for implication. Compare Theorem *5.41 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm5.41 395 | Theorem *5.41 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 12-Oct-2012.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | imbibi 396 | The antecedent of one side of a biconditional can be moved out of the biconditional to become the antecedent of the remaining biconditional. (Contributed by BJ, 1-Jan-2025.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jan-2025.) (Proof shortened by Garrett Katz, 15-Jun-2026.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒) → (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | imbibiOLD 397 | Obsolete version of imbibi 396 as of 15-Jun-2026. The antecedent of one side of a biconditional can be moved out of the biconditional to become the antecedent of the remaining biconditional. (Contributed by BJ, 1-Jan-2025.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Jan-2025.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ 𝜒) → (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.8 398 | Theorem *4.8 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → ¬ 𝜑) ↔ ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | pm4.81 399 | A formula is equivalent to its negation implying it. Theorem *4.81 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. Note that the second step, using pm2.24 125, could also use ax-1 6. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → 𝜑) ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | imim21b 400 | Simplify an implication between two implications when the antecedent of the first is a consequence of the antecedent of the second. The reverse form is useful in producing the successor step in induction proofs. (Contributed by Paul Chapman, 22-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Sep-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜑) → (((𝜑 → 𝜒) → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) ↔ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)))) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |