Home | Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 446 of 466) | < 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: | Metamath Proof Explorer
(1-29289) |
Hilbert Space Explorer
(29290-30812) |
Users' Mathboxes
(30813-46532) |
Type | Label | Description |
---|---|---|
Statement | ||
Theorem | mdandyvrx14 44501 | Given the exclusivities set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et exclude ze, si accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜁) & ⊢ (𝜓 ⊻ 𝜎) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((((𝜒 ⊻ 𝜁) ∧ (𝜃 ⊻ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜏 ⊻ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜂 ⊻ 𝜎)) | ||
Theorem | mdandyvrx15 44502 | Given the exclusivities set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et exclude ze, si accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜁) & ⊢ (𝜓 ⊻ 𝜎) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((((𝜒 ⊻ 𝜎) ∧ (𝜃 ⊻ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜏 ⊻ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜂 ⊻ 𝜎)) | ||
Theorem | H15NH16TH15IH16 44503 | Given 15 hypotheses and a 16th hypothesis, there exists a proof the 15 imply the 16th. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 8-Sep-2016.) |
⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ 𝜓 & ⊢ 𝜒 & ⊢ 𝜃 & ⊢ 𝜏 & ⊢ 𝜂 & ⊢ 𝜁 & ⊢ 𝜎 & ⊢ 𝜌 & ⊢ 𝜇 & ⊢ 𝜆 & ⊢ 𝜅 & ⊢ jph & ⊢ jps & ⊢ jch & ⊢ jth ⇒ ⊢ (((((((((((((((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) ∧ 𝜏) ∧ 𝜂) ∧ 𝜁) ∧ 𝜎) ∧ 𝜌) ∧ 𝜇) ∧ 𝜆) ∧ 𝜅) ∧ jph) ∧ jps) ∧ jch) → jth) | ||
Theorem | dandysum2p2e4 44504 |
CONTRADICTION PROVED AT 1 + 1 = 2 .
Given the right hypotheses we can prove a dandysum of 2+2=4. The qed step is the value '4' in Decimal BEING IMPLIED by the hypotheses. Note: Values that when added would exceed a 4bit value are not supported. Note: Digits begin from left (least) to right (greatest). E.g., 1000 would be '1', 0100 would be '2', 0010 would be '4'. How to perceive the hypotheses' bits in order: ( th <-> F. ), ( ta <-> F. ) Would be input value X's first bit, and input value Y's first bit. ( et <-> F ), ( ze <-> F. ) would be input value X's second bit, and input value Y's second bit. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.) |
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜂 ∧ 𝜁)) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ (𝜎 ∧ 𝜌)) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥) & ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥) & ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤) & ⊢ (𝜁 ↔ ⊤) & ⊢ (𝜎 ↔ ⊥) & ⊢ (𝜌 ↔ ⊥) & ⊢ (𝜇 ↔ ⊥) & ⊢ (𝜆 ↔ ⊥) & ⊢ (𝜅 ↔ ((𝜃 ⊻ 𝜏) ⊻ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏))) & ⊢ (jph ↔ ((𝜂 ⊻ 𝜁) ∨ 𝜑)) & ⊢ (jps ↔ ((𝜎 ⊻ 𝜌) ∨ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (jch ↔ ((𝜇 ⊻ 𝜆) ∨ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((((((((((((((((𝜑 ↔ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) ∧ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜂 ∧ 𝜁))) ∧ (𝜒 ↔ (𝜎 ∧ 𝜌))) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)) ∧ (𝜁 ↔ ⊤)) ∧ (𝜎 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜌 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜇 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜆 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜅 ↔ ((𝜃 ⊻ 𝜏) ⊻ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)))) ∧ (jph ↔ ((𝜂 ⊻ 𝜁) ∨ 𝜑))) ∧ (jps ↔ ((𝜎 ⊻ 𝜌) ∨ 𝜓))) ∧ (jch ↔ ((𝜇 ⊻ 𝜆) ∨ 𝜒))) → ((((𝜅 ↔ ⊥) ∧ (jph ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (jps ↔ ⊤)) ∧ (jch ↔ ⊥))) | ||
Theorem | mdandysum2p2e4 44505 |
CONTRADICTION PROVED AT 1 + 1 = 2 . Luckily Mario Carneiro did a
successful version of his own.
See Mario's Relevant Work: Half adder and full adder in propositional calculus. Given the right hypotheses we can prove a dandysum of 2+2=4. The qed step is the value '4' in Decimal BEING IMPLIED by the hypotheses. Note: Values that when added would exceed a 4bit value are not supported. Note: Digits begin from left (least) to right (greatest). E.g., 1000 would be '1', 0100 would be '2'. 0010 would be '4'. How to perceive the hypotheses' bits in order: ( th <-> F. ), ( ta <-> F. ) Would be input value X's first bit, and input value Y's first bit. ( et <-> F. ), ( ze <-> F. ) would be input value X's second bit, and input value Y's second bit. In mdandysum2p2e4, one might imagine what jth or jta could be then do the math with their truths. Also limited to the restriction jth, jta are having opposite truths equivalent to the stated truth constants. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.) |
⊢ (jth ↔ ⊥) & ⊢ (jta ↔ ⊤) & ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) & ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜂 ∧ 𝜁)) & ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ (𝜎 ∧ 𝜌)) & ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ jth) & ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ jth) & ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ jta) & ⊢ (𝜁 ↔ jta) & ⊢ (𝜎 ↔ jth) & ⊢ (𝜌 ↔ jth) & ⊢ (𝜇 ↔ jth) & ⊢ (𝜆 ↔ jth) & ⊢ (𝜅 ↔ ((𝜃 ⊻ 𝜏) ⊻ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏))) & ⊢ (jph ↔ ((𝜂 ⊻ 𝜁) ∨ 𝜑)) & ⊢ (jps ↔ ((𝜎 ⊻ 𝜌) ∨ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (jch ↔ ((𝜇 ⊻ 𝜆) ∨ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((((((((((((((((𝜑 ↔ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) ∧ (𝜓 ↔ (𝜂 ∧ 𝜁))) ∧ (𝜒 ↔ (𝜎 ∧ 𝜌))) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)) ∧ (𝜁 ↔ ⊤)) ∧ (𝜎 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜌 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜇 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜆 ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (𝜅 ↔ ((𝜃 ⊻ 𝜏) ⊻ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)))) ∧ (jph ↔ ((𝜂 ⊻ 𝜁) ∨ 𝜑))) ∧ (jps ↔ ((𝜎 ⊻ 𝜌) ∨ 𝜓))) ∧ (jch ↔ ((𝜇 ⊻ 𝜆) ∨ 𝜒))) → ((((𝜅 ↔ ⊥) ∧ (jph ↔ ⊥)) ∧ (jps ↔ ⊤)) ∧ (jch ↔ ⊥))) | ||
Theorem | adh-jarrsc 44506 | Replacement of a nested antecedent with an outer antecedent. Commuted simplificated form of elimination of a nested antecedent. Also holds intuitionistically. Polish prefix notation: CCCpqrCsCqr . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜒) → (𝜃 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))) | ||
Minimal implicational calculus, or intuitionistic implicational calculus, or positive implicational calculus, is the implicational fragment of minimal calculus (which is also the implicational fragment of intuitionistic calculus and of positive calculus). It is sometimes called "C-pure intuitionism" since the letter C is used to denote implication in Polish prefix notation. It can be axiomatized by the inference rule of modus ponens ax-mp 5 together with the axioms { ax-1 6, ax-2 7 } (sometimes written KS), or with { imim1 83, ax-1 6, pm2.43 56 } (written B'KW), or with { imim2 58, pm2.04 90, ax-1 6, pm2.43 56 } (written BCKW), or with the single axiom adh-minim 44507, or with the single axiom adh-minimp 44519. This section proves first adh-minim 44507 from { ax-1 6, ax-2 7 }, followed by the converse, due to Ivo Thomas; and then it proves adh-minimp 44519 from { ax-1 6, ax-2 7 }, also followed by the converse, also due to Ivo Thomas. Sources for this section are * Carew Arthur Meredith, A single axiom of positive logic, The Journal of Computing Systems, volume 1, issue 3, July 1953, pages 169--170; * Ivo Thomas, On Meredith's sole positive axiom, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, volume XV, number 3, July 1974, page 477, in which the derivations of { ax-1 6, ax-2 7 } from adh-minim 44507 are shortened (compared to Meredith's derivations in the aforementioned paper); * Carew Arthur Meredith and Arthur Norman Prior, Notes on the axiomatics of the propositional calculus, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, volume IV, number 3, July 1963, pages 171--187; and * the webpage https://web.ics.purdue.edu/~dulrich/C-pure-intuitionism-page.htm 44507 on Dolph Edward "Ted" Ulrich's website, where these and other single axioms for the minimal implicational calculus are listed. This entire section also holds intuitionistically. Users of the Polish prefix notation also often use a compact notation for proof derivations known as the D-notation where "D" stands for "condensed Detachment". For instance, "D21" means detaching ax-1 6 from ax-2 7, that is, using modus ponens ax-mp 5 with ax-1 6 as minor premise and ax-2 7 as major premise. When the numbered lemmas surpass 10, dots are added between the numbers. D-strings are accepted by the grammar Dundotted := digit | "D" Dundotted Dundotted ; Ddotted := digit + | "D" Ddotted "." Ddotted ; Dstr := Dundotted | Ddotted . (Contributed by BJ, 11-Apr-2021.) (Revised by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim 44507 | A single axiom for minimal implicational calculus, due to Meredith. Other single axioms of the same length are known, but it is thought to be the minimal length. This is the axiom from Carew Arthur Meredith, A single axiom of positive logic, The Journal of Computing Systems, volume 1, issue 3, July 1953, pages 169--170. A two-line review by Alonzo Church of this article can be found in The Journal of Symbolic Logic, volume 19, issue 2, June 1954, page 144, https://doi.org/10.2307/2268914. Known as "HI-1" on Dolph Edward "Ted" Ulrich's web page. In the next 6 lemmas and 3 theorems, ax-1 6 and ax-2 7 are derived from this single axiom in 16 detachments (instances of ax-mp 5) in total. Polish prefix notation: CCCpqrCsCCqCrtCqt . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜒) → (𝜃 → ((𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜏)) → (𝜓 → 𝜏)))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-ax1-ax2-lem1 44508 | First lemma for the derivation of ax-1 6 and ax-2 7 from adh-minim 44507 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CpCCqCCrCCsCqtCstuCqu . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → ((𝜒 → ((𝜃 → (𝜓 → 𝜏)) → (𝜃 → 𝜏))) → 𝜂)) → (𝜓 → 𝜂))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-ax1-ax2-lem2 44509 | Second lemma for the derivation of ax-1 6 and ax-2 7 from adh-minim 44507 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCpCCqCCrCpsCrstCpt . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → ((𝜓 → ((𝜒 → (𝜑 → 𝜃)) → (𝜒 → 𝜃))) → 𝜏)) → (𝜑 → 𝜏)) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-ax1-ax2-lem3 44510 | Third lemma for the derivation of ax-1 6 and ax-2 7 from adh-minim 44507 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCpCqrCqCsCpr . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (𝜓 → (𝜃 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-ax1-ax2-lem4 44511 | Fourth lemma for the derivation of ax-1 6 and ax-2 7 from adh-minim 44507 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCCpqrCCqCrsCqs . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜒) → ((𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → (𝜓 → 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-ax1 44512 | Derivation of ax-1 6 from adh-minim 44507 and ax-mp 5. Carew Arthur Meredith derived ax-1 6 in A single axiom of positive logic, The Journal of Computing Systems, volume 1, issue 3, July 1953, pages 169--170. However, here we follow the shortened derivation by Ivo Thomas, On Meredith's sole positive axiom, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, volume XV, number 3, July 1974, page 477. Polish prefix notation: CpCqp . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-ax2-lem5 44513 | Fifth lemma for the derivation of ax-2 7 from adh-minim 44507 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CpCCCqrsCCrCstCrt . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝜓 → 𝜒) → 𝜃) → ((𝜒 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) → (𝜒 → 𝜏)))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-ax2-lem6 44514 | Sixth lemma for the derivation of ax-2 7 from adh-minim 44507 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCpCCCCqrsCCrCstCrtuCpu . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → ((((𝜓 → 𝜒) → 𝜃) → ((𝜒 → (𝜃 → 𝜏)) → (𝜒 → 𝜏))) → 𝜂)) → (𝜑 → 𝜂)) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-ax2c 44515 | Derivation of a commuted form of ax-2 7 from adh-minim 44507 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCpqCCpCqrCpr . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-ax2 44516 | Derivation of ax-2 7 from adh-minim 44507 and ax-mp 5. Carew Arthur Meredith derived ax-2 7 in A single axiom of positive logic, The Journal of Computing Systems, volume 1, issue 3, July 1953, pages 169--170. However, here we follow the shortened derivation by Ivo Thomas, On Meredith's sole positive axiom, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, volume XV, number 3, July 1974, page 477. Polish prefix notation: CCpCqrCCpqCpr . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-idALT 44517 | Derivation of id 22 (reflexivity of implication, PM *2.08 WhiteheadRussell p. 101) from adh-minim-ax1 44512, adh-minim-ax2 44516, and ax-mp 5. It uses the derivation written DD211 in D-notation. (See head comment for an explanation.) Polish prefix notation: Cpp . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | adh-minim-pm2.43 44518 | Derivation of pm2.43 56 WhiteheadRussell p. 106 (also called "hilbert" or "W") from adh-minim-ax1 44512, adh-minim-ax2 44516, and ax-mp 5. It uses the derivation written DD22D21 in D-notation. (See head comment for an explanation.) (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp 44519 | Another single axiom for minimal implicational calculus, due to Meredith. Other single axioms of the same length are known, but it is thought to be the minimal length. Among single axioms of this length, it is the one with simplest antecedents (i.e., in the corresponding ordering of binary trees which first compares left subtrees, it is the first one). Known as "HI-2" on Dolph Edward "Ted" Ulrich's web page. In the next 4 lemmas and 5 theorems, ax-1 6 and ax-2 7 are derived from this other single axiom in 20 detachments (instances of ax-mp 5) in total. Polish prefix notation: CpCCqrCCCsqCrtCqt ; or CtCCpqCCCspCqrCpr in Carew Arthur Meredith and Arthur Norman Prior, Notes on the axiomatics of the propositional calculus, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, volume IV, number 3, July 1963, pages 171--187, on page 180. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2021.) (Revised by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → (((𝜃 → 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜏)) → (𝜓 → 𝜏)))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-jarr-imim1-ax2c-lem1 44520 | First lemma for the derivation of jarr 106, imim1 83, and a commuted form of ax-2 7, and indirectly ax-1 6 and ax-2 7, from adh-minimp 44519 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCpqCCCrpCqsCps . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (((𝜒 → 𝜑) → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) → (𝜑 → 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-jarr-lem2 44521 | Second lemma for the derivation of jarr 106, and indirectly ax-1 6, a commuted form of ax-2 7, and ax-2 7 proper, from adh-minimp 44519 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCCpqCCCrsCCCtrCsuCruvCqv . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (((𝜒 → 𝜃) → (((𝜏 → 𝜒) → (𝜃 → 𝜂)) → (𝜒 → 𝜂))) → 𝜁)) → (𝜓 → 𝜁)) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-jarr-ax2c-lem3 44522 | Third lemma for the derivation of jarr 106 and a commuted form of ax-2 7, and indirectly ax-1 6 and ax-2 7 proper , from adh-minimp 44519 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCCCpqCCCrpCqsCpstt . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (((𝜒 → 𝜑) → (𝜓 → 𝜃)) → (𝜑 → 𝜃))) → 𝜏) → 𝜏) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-sylsimp 44523 | Derivation of jarr 106 (also called "syll-simp") from minimp 1624 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCCpqrCqr . (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2021.) (Revised by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜒) → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-ax1 44524 | Derivation of ax-1 6 from adh-minimp 44519 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CpCqp . (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2021.) (Revised by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-imim1 44525 | Derivation of imim1 83 ("left antimonotonicity of implication", theorem *2.06 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 100) from adh-minimp 44519 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCpqCCqrCpr . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → (𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-ax2c 44526 | Derivation of a commuted form of ax-2 7 from adh-minimp 44519 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCpqCCpCqrCpr . (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2021.) (Revised by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → (𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-ax2-lem4 44527 | Fourth lemma for the derivation of ax-2 7 from adh-minimp 44519 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CpCCqCprCqr . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) → (𝜓 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-ax2 44528 | Derivation of ax-2 7 from adh-minimp 44519 and ax-mp 5. Polish prefix notation: CCpCqrCCpqCpr . (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2021.) (Revised by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-idALT 44529 | Derivation of id 22 (reflexivity of implication, PM *2.08 WhiteheadRussell p. 101) from adh-minimp-ax1 44524, adh-minimp-ax2 44528, and ax-mp 5. It uses the derivation written DD211 in D-notation. (See head comment for an explanation.) Polish prefix notation: Cpp . (Contributed by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | adh-minimp-pm2.43 44530 | Derivation of pm2.43 56 WhiteheadRussell p. 106 (also called "hilbert" or "W") from adh-minimp-ax1 44524, adh-minimp-ax2 44528, and ax-mp 5. It uses the derivation written DD22D21 in D-notation. (See head comment for an explanation.) Polish prefix notation: CCpCpqCpq . (Contributed by BJ, 31-May-2021.) (Revised by ADH, 10-Nov-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → (𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | eusnsn 44531* | There is a unique element of a singleton which is equal to another singleton. (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ ∃!𝑥{𝑥} = {𝑦} | ||
Theorem | absnsb 44532* | If the class abstraction {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} associated with the wff 𝜑 is a singleton, the wff is true for the singleton element. (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ ({𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦} → [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
Theorem | euabsneu 44533* | Another way to express existential uniqueness of a wff 𝜑: its associated class abstraction {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} is a singleton. Variant of euabsn2 4662 using existential uniqueness for the singleton element instead of existence only. (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∃!𝑦{𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦}) | ||
Theorem | elprneb 44534 | An element of a proper unordered pair is the first element iff it is not the second element. (Contributed by AV, 18-Jun-2020.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ {𝐵, 𝐶} ∧ 𝐵 ≠ 𝐶) → (𝐴 = 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ≠ 𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | oppr 44535 | Equality for ordered pairs implies equality of unordered pairs with the same elements. (Contributed by AV, 9-Jul-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = 〈𝐶, 𝐷〉 → {𝐴, 𝐵} = {𝐶, 𝐷})) | ||
Theorem | opprb 44536 | Equality for unordered pairs corresponds to equality of unordered pairs with the same elements. (Contributed by AV, 9-Jul-2023.) |
⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ (𝐶 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝑌)) → ({𝐴, 𝐵} = {𝐶, 𝐷} ↔ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = 〈𝐶, 𝐷〉 ∨ 〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = 〈𝐷, 𝐶〉))) | ||
Theorem | or2expropbilem1 44537* | Lemma 1 for or2expropbi 44539 and ich2exprop 44934. (Contributed by AV, 16-Jul-2023.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑋) → ((𝐴 = 𝑎 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝑏) → (𝜑 → ∃𝑥∃𝑦(〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑏][𝑥 / 𝑎]𝜑)))) | ||
Theorem | or2expropbilem2 44538* | Lemma 2 for or2expropbi 44539 and ich2exprop 44934. (Contributed by AV, 16-Jul-2023.) |
⊢ (∃𝑎∃𝑏(〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = 〈𝑎, 𝑏〉 ∧ 𝜑) ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦(〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∧ [𝑦 / 𝑏][𝑥 / 𝑎]𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | or2expropbi 44539* | If two classes are strictly ordered, there is an ordered pair of both classes fulfilling a wff iff there is an unordered pair of both classes fulfilling the wff. (Contributed by AV, 26-Aug-2023.) |
⊢ (((𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑅 Or 𝑋) ∧ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝐴𝑅𝐵)) → (∃𝑎∃𝑏({𝐴, 𝐵} = {𝑎, 𝑏} ∧ (𝑎𝑅𝑏 ∧ 𝜑)) ↔ ∃𝑎∃𝑏(〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = 〈𝑎, 𝑏〉 ∧ (𝑎𝑅𝑏 ∧ 𝜑)))) | ||
Theorem | eubrv 44540* | If there is a unique set which is related to a class, then the class must be a set. (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (∃!𝑏 𝐴𝑅𝑏 → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | eubrdm 44541* | If there is a unique set which is related to a class, then the class is an element of the domain of the relation. (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (∃!𝑏 𝐴𝑅𝑏 → 𝐴 ∈ dom 𝑅) | ||
Theorem | eldmressn 44542 | Element of the domain of a restriction to a singleton. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 2-Jul-2017.) |
⊢ (𝐵 ∈ dom (𝐹 ↾ {𝐴}) → 𝐵 = 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | iota0def 44543* | Example for a defined iota being the empty set, i.e., ∀𝑦𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 is a wff satisfied by a unique value 𝑥, namely 𝑥 = ∅ (the empty set is the one and only set which is a subset of every set). (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (℩𝑥∀𝑦 𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦) = ∅ | ||
Theorem | iota0ndef 44544* | Example for an undefined iota being the empty set, i.e., ∀𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 is a wff not satisfied by a (unique) value 𝑥 (there is no set, and therefore certainly no unique set, which contains every set). (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (℩𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥) = ∅ | ||
Theorem | fveqvfvv 44545 | If a function's value at an argument is the universal class (which can never be the case because of fvex 6796), the function's value at this argument is any set (especially the empty set). In short "If a function's value is a proper class, it is a set", which sounds strange/contradictory, but which is a consequence of that a contradiction implies anything (see pm2.21i 119). (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 26-May-2017.) |
⊢ ((𝐹‘𝐴) = V → (𝐹‘𝐴) = 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | fnresfnco 44546 | Composition of two functions, similar to fnco 6558. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 25-Jul-2017.) |
⊢ (((𝐹 ↾ ran 𝐺) Fn ran 𝐺 ∧ 𝐺 Fn 𝐵) → (𝐹 ∘ 𝐺) Fn 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | funcoressn 44547 | A composition restricted to a singleton is a function under certain conditions. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 25-Jul-2017.) |
⊢ ((((𝐺‘𝑋) ∈ dom 𝐹 ∧ Fun (𝐹 ↾ {(𝐺‘𝑋)})) ∧ (𝐺 Fn 𝐴 ∧ 𝑋 ∈ 𝐴)) → Fun ((𝐹 ∘ 𝐺) ↾ {𝑋})) | ||
Theorem | funressnfv 44548 | A restriction to a singleton with a function value is a function under certain conditions. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 25-Jul-2017.) (Proof shortened by Peter Mazsa, 2-Oct-2022.) |
⊢ (((𝑋 ∈ dom (𝐹 ∘ 𝐺) ∧ Fun ((𝐹 ∘ 𝐺) ↾ {𝑋})) ∧ (𝐺 Fn 𝐴 ∧ 𝑋 ∈ 𝐴)) → Fun (𝐹 ↾ {(𝐺‘𝑋)})) | ||
Theorem | funressndmfvrn 44549 | The value of a function 𝐹 at a set 𝐴 is in the range of the function 𝐹 if 𝐴 is in the domain of the function 𝐹. It is sufficient that 𝐹 is a function at 𝐴. (Contributed by AV, 1-Sep-2022.) |
⊢ ((Fun (𝐹 ↾ {𝐴}) ∧ 𝐴 ∈ dom 𝐹) → (𝐹‘𝐴) ∈ ran 𝐹) | ||
Theorem | funressnvmo 44550* | A function restricted to a singleton has at most one value for the singleton element as argument. (Contributed by AV, 2-Sep-2022.) |
⊢ (Fun (𝐹 ↾ {𝑥}) → ∃*𝑦 𝑥𝐹𝑦) | ||
Theorem | funressnmo 44551* | A function restricted to a singleton has at most one value for the singleton element as argument. (Contributed by AV, 2-Sep-2022.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ Fun (𝐹 ↾ {𝐴})) → ∃*𝑦 𝐴𝐹𝑦) | ||
Theorem | funressneu 44552* | There is exactly one value of a class which is a function restricted to a singleton, analogous to funeu 6466. 𝐴 ∈ V is required because otherwise ∃!𝑦𝐴𝐹𝑦, see brprcneu 6773. (Contributed by AV, 7-Sep-2022.) |
⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) ∧ Fun (𝐹 ↾ {𝐴}) ∧ 𝐴𝐹𝐵) → ∃!𝑦 𝐴𝐹𝑦) | ||
Theorem | fresfo 44553 | Conditions for a restriction to be an onto function. Part of fresf1o 30975. (Contributed by AV, 29-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ ((Fun 𝐹 ∧ 𝐶 ⊆ ran 𝐹) → (𝐹 ↾ (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶)):(◡𝐹 “ 𝐶)–onto→𝐶) | ||
Theorem | fsetsniunop 44554* | The class of all functions from a (proper) singleton into 𝐵 is the union of all the singletons of (proper) ordered pairs over the elements of 𝐵 as second component. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝑆 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:{𝑆}⟶𝐵} = ∪ 𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 {{〈𝑆, 𝑏〉}}) | ||
Theorem | fsetabsnop 44555* | The class of all functions from a (proper) singleton into 𝐵 is the class of all the singletons of (proper) ordered pairs over the elements of 𝐵 as second component. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝑆 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:{𝑆}⟶𝐵} = {𝑦 ∣ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 𝑦 = {〈𝑆, 𝑏〉}}) | ||
Theorem | fsetsnf 44556* | The mapping of an element of a class to a singleton function is a function. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑦 ∣ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 𝑦 = {〈𝑆, 𝑏〉}} & ⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ {〈𝑆, 𝑥〉}) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑆 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝐹:𝐵⟶𝐴) | ||
Theorem | fsetsnf1 44557* | The mapping of an element of a class to a singleton function is an injection. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑦 ∣ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 𝑦 = {〈𝑆, 𝑏〉}} & ⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ {〈𝑆, 𝑥〉}) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑆 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝐹:𝐵–1-1→𝐴) | ||
Theorem | fsetsnfo 44558* | The mapping of an element of a class to a singleton function is a surjection. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑦 ∣ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 𝑦 = {〈𝑆, 𝑏〉}} & ⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ {〈𝑆, 𝑥〉}) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑆 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝐹:𝐵–onto→𝐴) | ||
Theorem | fsetsnf1o 44559* | The mapping of an element of a class to a singleton function is a bijection. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐴 = {𝑦 ∣ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 𝑦 = {〈𝑆, 𝑏〉}} & ⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ {〈𝑆, 𝑥〉}) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑆 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝐹:𝐵–1-1-onto→𝐴) | ||
Theorem | fsetsnprcnex 44560* | The class of all functions from a (proper) singleton into a proper class 𝐵 is not a set. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝑆 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∉ V) → {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:{𝑆}⟶𝐵} ∉ V) | ||
Theorem | cfsetssfset 44561 | The class of constant functions is a subclass of the class of functions. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐹 = {𝑓 ∣ (𝑓:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑓‘𝑧) = 𝑏)} ⇒ ⊢ 𝐹 ⊆ {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:𝐴⟶𝐵} | ||
Theorem | cfsetsnfsetfv 44562* | The function value of the mapping of the class of singleton functions into the class of constant functions. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐹 = {𝑓 ∣ (𝑓:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑓‘𝑧) = 𝑏)} & ⊢ 𝐺 = {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥:{𝑌}⟶𝐵} & ⊢ 𝐻 = (𝑔 ∈ 𝐺 ↦ (𝑎 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ (𝑔‘𝑌))) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑋 ∈ 𝐺) → (𝐻‘𝑋) = (𝑎 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ (𝑋‘𝑌))) | ||
Theorem | cfsetsnfsetf 44563* | The mapping of the class of singleton functions into the class of constant functions is a function. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐹 = {𝑓 ∣ (𝑓:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑓‘𝑧) = 𝑏)} & ⊢ 𝐺 = {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥:{𝑌}⟶𝐵} & ⊢ 𝐻 = (𝑔 ∈ 𝐺 ↦ (𝑎 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ (𝑔‘𝑌))) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐻:𝐺⟶𝐹) | ||
Theorem | cfsetsnfsetf1 44564* | The mapping of the class of singleton functions into the class of constant functions is an injection. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐹 = {𝑓 ∣ (𝑓:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑓‘𝑧) = 𝑏)} & ⊢ 𝐺 = {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥:{𝑌}⟶𝐵} & ⊢ 𝐻 = (𝑔 ∈ 𝐺 ↦ (𝑎 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ (𝑔‘𝑌))) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐻:𝐺–1-1→𝐹) | ||
Theorem | cfsetsnfsetfo 44565* | The mapping of the class of singleton functions into the class of constant functions is a surjection. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐹 = {𝑓 ∣ (𝑓:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑓‘𝑧) = 𝑏)} & ⊢ 𝐺 = {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥:{𝑌}⟶𝐵} & ⊢ 𝐻 = (𝑔 ∈ 𝐺 ↦ (𝑎 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ (𝑔‘𝑌))) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐻:𝐺–onto→𝐹) | ||
Theorem | cfsetsnfsetf1o 44566* | The mapping of the class of singleton functions into the class of constant functions is a bijection. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ 𝐹 = {𝑓 ∣ (𝑓:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ ∃𝑏 ∈ 𝐵 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑓‘𝑧) = 𝑏)} & ⊢ 𝐺 = {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥:{𝑌}⟶𝐵} & ⊢ 𝐻 = (𝑔 ∈ 𝐺 ↦ (𝑎 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ (𝑔‘𝑌))) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐻:𝐺–1-1-onto→𝐹) | ||
Theorem | fsetprcnexALT 44567* | First version of proof for fsetprcnex 8659, which was much more complicated. (Contributed by AV, 14-Sep-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐴 ≠ ∅) ∧ 𝐵 ∉ V) → {𝑓 ∣ 𝑓:𝐴⟶𝐵} ∉ V) | ||
Theorem | fcoreslem1 44568 | Lemma 1 for fcores 44572. (Contributed by AV, 17-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐸)) | ||
Theorem | fcoreslem2 44569 | Lemma 2 for fcores 44572. (Contributed by AV, 17-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ran 𝑋 = 𝐸) | ||
Theorem | fcoreslem3 44570 | Lemma 3 for fcores 44572. (Contributed by AV, 13-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋:𝑃–onto→𝐸) | ||
Theorem | fcoreslem4 44571 | Lemma 4 for fcores 44572. (Contributed by AV, 17-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷) & ⊢ 𝑌 = (𝐺 ↾ 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑌 ∘ 𝑋) Fn 𝑃) | ||
Theorem | fcores 44572 | Every composite function (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹) can be written as composition of restrictions of the composed functions (to their minimum domains). (Contributed by GL and AV, 17-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷) & ⊢ 𝑌 = (𝐺 ↾ 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹) = (𝑌 ∘ 𝑋)) | ||
Theorem | fcoresf1lem 44573 | Lemma for fcoresf1 44574. (Contributed by AV, 18-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷) & ⊢ 𝑌 = (𝐺 ↾ 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑍 ∈ 𝑃) → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹)‘𝑍) = (𝑌‘(𝑋‘𝑍))) | ||
Theorem | fcoresf1 44574 | If a composition is injective, then the restrictions of its components to the minimum domains are injective. (Contributed by GL and AV, 18-Sep-2024.) (Revised by AV, 7-Oct-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷) & ⊢ 𝑌 = (𝐺 ↾ 𝐸) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝑃–1-1→𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑋:𝑃–1-1→𝐸 ∧ 𝑌:𝐸–1-1→𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | fcoresf1b 44575 | A composition is injective iff the restrictions of its components to the minimum domains are injective. (Contributed by GL and AV, 7-Oct-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷) & ⊢ 𝑌 = (𝐺 ↾ 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝑃–1-1→𝐷 ↔ (𝑋:𝑃–1-1→𝐸 ∧ 𝑌:𝐸–1-1→𝐷))) | ||
Theorem | fcoresfo 44576 | If a composition is surjective, then the restriction of its first component to the minimum domain is surjective. (Contributed by AV, 17-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷) & ⊢ 𝑌 = (𝐺 ↾ 𝐸) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝑃–onto→𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌:𝐸–onto→𝐷) | ||
Theorem | fcoresfob 44577 | A composition is surjective iff the restriction of its first component to the minimum domain is surjective. (Contributed by GL and AV, 7-Oct-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷) & ⊢ 𝑌 = (𝐺 ↾ 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝑃–onto→𝐷 ↔ 𝑌:𝐸–onto→𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | fcoresf1ob 44578 | A composition is bijective iff the restriction of its first component to the minimum domain is bijective and the restriction of its second component to the minimum domain is injective. (Contributed by GL and AV, 7-Oct-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷) & ⊢ 𝑌 = (𝐺 ↾ 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝑃–1-1-onto→𝐷 ↔ (𝑋:𝑃–1-1→𝐸 ∧ 𝑌:𝐸–1-1-onto→𝐷))) | ||
Theorem | f1cof1blem 44579 | Lemma for f1cof1b 44580 and focofob 44583. (Contributed by AV, 18-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵) & ⊢ 𝐸 = (ran 𝐹 ∩ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑃 = (◡𝐹 “ 𝐶) & ⊢ 𝑋 = (𝐹 ↾ 𝑃) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷) & ⊢ 𝑌 = (𝐺 ↾ 𝐸) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ran 𝐹 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝑃 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝐸 = 𝐶) ∧ (𝑋 = 𝐹 ∧ 𝑌 = 𝐺))) | ||
Theorem | f1cof1b 44580 | If the range of 𝐹 equals the domain of 𝐺, then the composition (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹) is injective iff 𝐹 and 𝐺 are both injective. (Contributed by GL and AV, 19-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷 ∧ ran 𝐹 = 𝐶) → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝐴–1-1→𝐷 ↔ (𝐹:𝐴–1-1→𝐵 ∧ 𝐺:𝐶–1-1→𝐷))) | ||
Theorem | funfocofob 44581 | If the domain of a function 𝐺 is a subset of the range of a function 𝐹, then the composition (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹) is surjective iff 𝐺 is surjective. (Contributed by GL and AV, 29-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ ((Fun 𝐹 ∧ 𝐺:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ 𝐴 ⊆ ran 𝐹) → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):(◡𝐹 “ 𝐴)–onto→𝐵 ↔ 𝐺:𝐴–onto→𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | fnfocofob 44582 | If the domain of a function 𝐺 equals the range of a function 𝐹, then the composition (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹) is surjective iff 𝐺 is surjective. (Contributed by GL and AV, 29-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝐹 Fn 𝐴 ∧ 𝐺:𝐵⟶𝐶 ∧ ran 𝐹 = 𝐵) → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝐴–onto→𝐶 ↔ 𝐺:𝐵–onto→𝐶)) | ||
Theorem | focofob 44583 | If the domain of a function 𝐺 equals the range of a function 𝐹, then the composition (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹) is surjective iff 𝐺 and 𝐹 as function to the domain of 𝐺 are both surjective. Symmetric version of fnfocofob 44582 including the fact that 𝐹 is a surjection onto its range. (Contributed by GL and AV, 20-Sep-2024.) (Proof shortened by AV, 29-Sep-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷 ∧ ran 𝐹 = 𝐶) → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝐴–onto→𝐷 ↔ (𝐹:𝐴–onto→𝐶 ∧ 𝐺:𝐶–onto→𝐷))) | ||
Theorem | f1ocof1ob 44584 | If the range of 𝐹 equals the domain of 𝐺, then the composition (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹) is bijective iff 𝐹 and 𝐺 are both bijective. (Contributed by GL and AV, 7-Oct-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷 ∧ ran 𝐹 = 𝐶) → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝐴–1-1-onto→𝐷 ↔ (𝐹:𝐴–1-1→𝐶 ∧ 𝐺:𝐶–1-1-onto→𝐷))) | ||
Theorem | f1ocof1ob2 44585 | If the range of 𝐹 equals the domain of 𝐺, then the composition (𝐺 ∘ 𝐹) is bijective iff 𝐹 and 𝐺 are both bijective. Symmetric version of f1ocof1ob 44584 including the fact that 𝐹 is a surjection onto its range. (Contributed by GL and AV, 20-Sep-2024.) (Proof shortened by AV, 7-Oct-2024.) |
⊢ ((𝐹:𝐴⟶𝐵 ∧ 𝐺:𝐶⟶𝐷 ∧ ran 𝐹 = 𝐶) → ((𝐺 ∘ 𝐹):𝐴–1-1-onto→𝐷 ↔ (𝐹:𝐴–1-1-onto→𝐶 ∧ 𝐺:𝐶–1-1-onto→𝐷))) | ||
Syntax | caiota 44586 | Extend class notation with an alternative for Russell's definition of a description binder (inverted iota). |
class (℩'𝑥𝜑) | ||
Theorem | aiotajust 44587* | Soundness justification theorem for df-aiota 44588. (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ ∩ {𝑦 ∣ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦}} = ∩ {𝑧 ∣ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑧}} | ||
Definition | df-aiota 44588* |
Alternate version of Russell's definition of a description binder, which
can be read as "the unique 𝑥 such that 𝜑", where 𝜑
ordinarily contains 𝑥 as a free variable. Our definition
is
meaningful only when there is exactly one 𝑥 such that 𝜑 is true
(see aiotaval 44598); otherwise, it is not a set (see aiotaexb 44592), or even
more concrete, it is the universe V (see aiotavb 44593). Since this
is an alternative for df-iota 6395, we call this symbol ℩'
alternate iota in the following.
The advantage of this definition is the clear distinguishability of the defined and undefined cases: the alternate iota over a wff is defined iff it is a set (see aiotaexb 44592). With the original definition, there is no corresponding theorem (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (℩𝑥𝜑) ≠ ∅), because ∅ can be a valid unique set satisfying a wff (see, for example, iota0def 44543). Only the right to left implication would hold, see (negated) iotanul 6415. For defined cases, however, both definitions df-iota 6395 and df-aiota 44588 are equivalent, see reuaiotaiota 44591. (Proposed by BJ, 13-Aug-2022.) (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (℩'𝑥𝜑) = ∩ {𝑦 ∣ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦}} | ||
Theorem | dfaiota2 44589* | Alternate definition of the alternate version of Russell's definition of a description binder. Definition 8.18 in [Quine] p. 56. (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (℩'𝑥𝜑) = ∩ {𝑦 ∣ ∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦)} | ||
Theorem | reuabaiotaiota 44590* | The iota and the alternate iota over a wff 𝜑 are equal iff there is a unique satisfying value of {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦}. (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (∃!𝑦{𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑦} ↔ (℩𝑥𝜑) = (℩'𝑥𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | reuaiotaiota 44591 | The iota and the alternate iota over a wff 𝜑 are equal iff there is a unique value 𝑥 satisfying 𝜑. (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (℩𝑥𝜑) = (℩'𝑥𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | aiotaexb 44592 | The alternate iota over a wff 𝜑 is a set iff there is a unique value 𝑥 satisfying 𝜑. (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (℩'𝑥𝜑) ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | aiotavb 44593 | The alternate iota over a wff 𝜑 is the universe iff there is no unique value 𝑥 satisfying 𝜑. (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (¬ ∃!𝑥𝜑 ↔ (℩'𝑥𝜑) = V) | ||
Theorem | aiotaint 44594 | This is to df-aiota 44588 what iotauni 6412 is to df-iota 6395 (it uses intersection like df-aiota 44588, similar to iotauni 6412 using union like df-iota 6395; we could also prove an analogous result using union here too, in the same way that we have iotaint 6413). (Contributed by BJ, 31-Aug-2024.) |
⊢ (∃!𝑥𝜑 → (℩'𝑥𝜑) = ∩ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}) | ||
Theorem | dfaiota3 44595 | Alternate definition of ℩': this is to df-aiota 44588 what dfiota4 6429 is to df-iota 6395. operation using the if operator. It is simpler than df-aiota 44588 and uses no dummy variables, so it would be the preferred definition if ℩' becomes the description binder used in set.mm. (Contributed by BJ, 31-Aug-2024.) |
⊢ (℩'𝑥𝜑) = if(∃!𝑥𝜑, ∩ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}, V) | ||
Theorem | iotan0aiotaex 44596 | If the iota over a wff 𝜑 is not empty, the alternate iota over 𝜑 is a set. (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ ((℩𝑥𝜑) ≠ ∅ → (℩'𝑥𝜑) ∈ V) | ||
Theorem | aiotaexaiotaiota 44597 | The alternate iota over a wff 𝜑 is a set iff the iota and the alternate iota over 𝜑 are equal. (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ ((℩'𝑥𝜑) ∈ V ↔ (℩𝑥𝜑) = (℩'𝑥𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | aiotaval 44598* | Theorem 8.19 in [Quine] p. 57. This theorem is the fundamental property of (alternate) iota. (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥(𝜑 ↔ 𝑥 = 𝑦) → (℩'𝑥𝜑) = 𝑦) | ||
Theorem | aiota0def 44599* | Example for a defined alternate iota being the empty set, i.e., ∀𝑦𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦 is a wff satisfied by a unique value 𝑥, namely 𝑥 = ∅ (the empty set is the one and only set which is a subset of every set). This corresponds to iota0def 44543. (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (℩'𝑥∀𝑦 𝑥 ⊆ 𝑦) = ∅ | ||
Theorem | aiota0ndef 44600* | Example for an undefined alternate iota being no set, i.e., ∀𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 is a wff not satisfied by a (unique) value 𝑥 (there is no set, and therefore certainly no unique set, which contains every set). This is different from iota0ndef 44544, where the iota still is a set (the empty set). (Contributed by AV, 25-Aug-2022.) |
⊢ (℩'𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥) ∉ V |
< Previous Next > |
Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |