P. 470 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 46901-47000   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	sigarcol 46901*	Given three points 𝐴, 𝐵 and 𝐶 such that ¬ 𝐴 = 𝐵, the point 𝐶 lies on the line going through 𝐴 and 𝐵 iff the corresponding signed area is zero. That justifies the usage of signed area as a collinearity indicator. (Contributed by Saveliy Skresanov, 22-Sep-2017.)
⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑥 ∈ ℂ, 𝑦 ∈ ℂ ↦ (ℑ‘((∗‘𝑥) · 𝑦)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐶 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝐴 = 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐴 − 𝐶)𝐺(𝐵 − 𝐶)) = 0 ↔ ∃𝑡 ∈ ℝ 𝐶 = (𝐵 + (𝑡 · (𝐴 − 𝐵)))))
Theorem	sharhght 46902*	Let 𝐴𝐵𝐶 be a triangle, and let 𝐷 lie on the line 𝐴𝐵. Then (doubled) areas of triangles 𝐴𝐷𝐶 and 𝐶𝐷𝐵 relate as lengths of corresponding bases 𝐴𝐷 and 𝐷𝐵. (Contributed by Saveliy Skresanov, 23-Sep-2017.)
⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑥 ∈ ℂ, 𝑦 ∈ ℂ ↦ (ℑ‘((∗‘𝑥) · 𝑦)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐶 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐷 ∈ ℂ ∧ ((𝐴 − 𝐷)𝐺(𝐵 − 𝐷)) = 0))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐶 − 𝐴)𝐺(𝐷 − 𝐴)) · (𝐵 − 𝐷)) = (((𝐶 − 𝐵)𝐺(𝐷 − 𝐵)) · (𝐴 − 𝐷)))
Theorem	sigaradd 46903*	Subtracting (double) area of 𝐴𝐷𝐶 from 𝐴𝐵𝐶 yields the (double) area of 𝐷𝐵𝐶. (Contributed by Saveliy Skresanov, 23-Sep-2017.)
⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑥 ∈ ℂ, 𝑦 ∈ ℂ ↦ (ℑ‘((∗‘𝑥) · 𝑦)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐶 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐷 ∈ ℂ ∧ ((𝐴 − 𝐷)𝐺(𝐵 − 𝐷)) = 0))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐵 − 𝐶)𝐺(𝐴 − 𝐶)) − ((𝐷 − 𝐶)𝐺(𝐴 − 𝐶))) = ((𝐵 − 𝐶)𝐺(𝐷 − 𝐶)))
Theorem	cevathlem1 46904	Ceva's theorem first lemma. Multiplies three identities and divides by the common factors. (Contributed by Saveliy Skresanov, 24-Sep-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐶 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐷 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐸 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐹 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐺 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐻 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐾 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ≠ 0 ∧ 𝐸 ≠ 0 ∧ 𝐶 ≠ 0))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐴 · 𝐵) = (𝐶 · 𝐷) ∧ (𝐸 · 𝐹) = (𝐴 · 𝐺) ∧ (𝐶 · 𝐻) = (𝐸 · 𝐾)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐵 · 𝐹) · 𝐻) = ((𝐷 · 𝐺) · 𝐾))
Theorem	cevathlem2 46905*	Ceva's theorem second lemma. Relate (doubled) areas of triangles 𝐶𝐴𝑂 and 𝐴𝐵𝑂 with of segments 𝐵𝐷 and 𝐷𝐶. (Contributed by Saveliy Skresanov, 24-Sep-2017.)
⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑥 ∈ ℂ, 𝑦 ∈ ℂ ↦ (ℑ‘((∗‘𝑥) · 𝑦)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐶 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐷 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐸 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑂 ∈ ℂ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐴 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐷 − 𝑂)) = 0 ∧ ((𝐵 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐸 − 𝑂)) = 0 ∧ ((𝐶 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐹 − 𝑂)) = 0))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐴 − 𝐹)𝐺(𝐵 − 𝐹)) = 0 ∧ ((𝐵 − 𝐷)𝐺(𝐶 − 𝐷)) = 0 ∧ ((𝐶 − 𝐸)𝐺(𝐴 − 𝐸)) = 0))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐴 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐵 − 𝑂)) ≠ 0 ∧ ((𝐵 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐶 − 𝑂)) ≠ 0 ∧ ((𝐶 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐴 − 𝑂)) ≠ 0))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐶 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐴 − 𝑂)) · (𝐵 − 𝐷)) = (((𝐴 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐵 − 𝑂)) · (𝐷 − 𝐶)))
Theorem	cevath 46906*	Ceva's theorem. Let 𝐴𝐵𝐶 be a triangle and let points 𝐹, 𝐷 and 𝐸 lie on sides 𝐴𝐵, 𝐵𝐶, 𝐶𝐴 correspondingly. Suppose that cevians 𝐴𝐷, 𝐵𝐸 and 𝐶𝐹 intersect at one point 𝑂. Then triangle's sides are partitioned into segments and their lengths satisfy a certain identity. Here we obtain a bit stronger version by using complex numbers themselves instead of their absolute values. The proof goes by applying cevathlem2 46905 three times and then using cevathlem1 46904 to multiply obtained identities and prove the theorem. In the theorem statement we are using function 𝐺 as a collinearity indicator. For justification of that use, see sigarcol 46901. This is Metamath 100 proof #61. (Contributed by Saveliy Skresanov, 24-Sep-2017.)
⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑥 ∈ ℂ, 𝑦 ∈ ℂ ↦ (ℑ‘((∗‘𝑥) · 𝑦)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐵 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐶 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐷 ∈ ℂ ∧ 𝐸 ∈ ℂ))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑂 ∈ ℂ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐴 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐷 − 𝑂)) = 0 ∧ ((𝐵 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐸 − 𝑂)) = 0 ∧ ((𝐶 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐹 − 𝑂)) = 0))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐴 − 𝐹)𝐺(𝐵 − 𝐹)) = 0 ∧ ((𝐵 − 𝐷)𝐺(𝐶 − 𝐷)) = 0 ∧ ((𝐶 − 𝐸)𝐺(𝐴 − 𝐸)) = 0))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐴 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐵 − 𝑂)) ≠ 0 ∧ ((𝐵 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐶 − 𝑂)) ≠ 0 ∧ ((𝐶 − 𝑂)𝐺(𝐴 − 𝑂)) ≠ 0))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝐴 − 𝐹) · (𝐶 − 𝐸)) · (𝐵 − 𝐷)) = (((𝐹 − 𝐵) · (𝐸 − 𝐴)) · (𝐷 − 𝐶)))
21.44.2  Simple groups
Theorem	simpcntrab 46907	The center of a simple group is trivial or the group is abelian. (Contributed by SS, 3-Jan-2024.)
⊢ 𝐵 = (Base‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 0 = (0g‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ 𝑍 = (Cntr‘𝐺)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐺 ∈ SimpGrp)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑍 = { 0 } ∨ 𝐺 ∈ Abel))
21.45  Mathbox for Ender Ting
21.45.1  Increasing sequences and subsequences
Theorem	et-ltneverrefl 46908	Less-than class is never reflexive. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 22-Nov-2024.) Prefer to specify theorem domain and then apply ltnri 11219. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ 𝐴 < 𝐴
Theorem	et-equeucl 46909	Alternative proof that equality is left-Euclidean, using ax7 2017 directly instead of utility theorems; done for practice. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 21-Dec-2024.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝑦 = 𝑧 → 𝑥 = 𝑦))
Theorem	et-sqrtnegnre 46910	The square root of a negative number is not a real number. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 5-Jan-2025.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ ℝ ∧ 𝐴 < 0) → ¬ (√‘𝐴) ∈ ℝ)
Theorem	ormklocald 46911*	If elements of a certain sequence are ordered with respect to a certain relation, then its consecutive elements satisfy that relation (so-called "local monotonicity"). (Contributed by Ender Ting, 30-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Or 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^(𝑇 + 1))(𝐵‘𝑘) ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^𝑇)∀𝑡 ∈ (1..^(𝑇 + 1))(𝑘 < 𝑡 → (𝐵‘𝑘)𝑅(𝐵‘𝑡)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^𝑇)(𝐵‘𝑘)𝑅(𝐵‘(𝑘 + 1)))
Theorem	ormkglobd 46912*	If all adjacent elements of a certain sequence are ordered according to a relation which is a total order on S, then any element is so related to anything to right of it (so-called "global monotonicity"). Deduction form. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 30-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Or 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^(𝑇 + 1))(𝐵‘𝑘) ∈ 𝑆)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^𝑇)(𝐵‘𝑘)𝑅(𝐵‘(𝑘 + 1)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^𝑇)∀𝑡 ∈ (1..^(𝑇 + 1))(𝑘 < 𝑡 → (𝐵‘𝑘)𝑅(𝐵‘𝑡)))
Theorem	natlocalincr 46913*	Global monotonicity on half-open range implies local monotonicity. Inference form. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 22-Nov-2024.)
⊢ ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^𝑇)∀𝑡 ∈ (1..^(𝑇 + 1))(𝑘 < 𝑡 → (𝐵‘𝑘) < (𝐵‘𝑡))    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^𝑇)(𝐵‘𝑘) < (𝐵‘(𝑘 + 1))
Theorem	natglobalincr 46914*	Local monotonicity on half-open integer range implies global monotonicity. Inference form. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 23-Nov-2024.)
⊢ ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^𝑇)(𝐵‘𝑘) < (𝐵‘(𝑘 + 1))    &   ⊢ 𝑇 ∈ ℤ    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑘 ∈ (0..^𝑇)∀𝑡 ∈ ((𝑘 + 1)...𝑇)(𝐵‘𝑘) < (𝐵‘𝑡)
21.45.2  Scratchpad for number theory
Theorem	evenwodadd 46915	If an integer is multiplied by its sum with an odd number (thus changing its parity), the result is even. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 30-Apr-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑖 ∈ ℤ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑗 ∈ ℤ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 2 ∥ 𝑗)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 2 ∥ (𝑖 · (𝑖 + 𝑗)))
21.45.3  Scratchpad for math on real numbers
Theorem	squeezedltsq 46916	If a real value is squeezed between two others, its square is less than square of at least one of them. Deduction form. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 31-Oct-2025.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ ℝ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ ℝ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ ℝ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 < 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 < 𝐶)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐵 · 𝐵) < (𝐴 · 𝐴) ∨ (𝐵 · 𝐵) < (𝐶 · 𝐶)))
Theorem	lambert0 46917	A value of Lambert W (product logarithm) function at zero. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 13-Nov-2025.)
⊢ 𝑅 = ◡(𝑥 ∈ ℂ ↦ (𝑥 · (exp‘𝑥)))    ⇒   ⊢ 0𝑅0
Theorem	lamberte 46918	A value of Lambert W (product logarithm) function at e. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 13-Nov-2025.)
⊢ 𝑅 = ◡(𝑥 ∈ ℂ ↦ (𝑥 · (exp‘𝑥)))    ⇒   ⊢ e𝑅1
Theorem	cjnpoly 46919	Complex conjugation operator is not a polynomial with complex coefficients. Indeed; if it was, then multiplying 𝑥 conjugate by 𝑥 itself and adding 1 would yield a nowhere-zero non-constant polynomial, contrary to the fta 27015. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 8-Dec-2025.)
⊢ ¬ ∗ ∈ (Poly‘ℂ)
Theorem	tannpoly 46920	The tangent function is not a polynomial with complex coefficients, as it is not defined on the whole complex plane. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 10-Dec-2025.)
⊢ ¬ tan ∈ (Poly‘ℂ)
Theorem	sinnpoly 46921	Sine function is not a polynomial with complex coefficients. Indeed, it has infinitely many zeros but is not constant zero, contrary to fta1 26241. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 10-Dec-2025.)
⊢ ¬ sin ∈ (Poly‘ℂ)
21.46  Mathbox for Jarvin Udandy
Theorem	hirstL-ax3 46922	The third axiom of a system called "L" but proven to be a theorem since set.mm uses a different third axiom. This is named hirst after Holly P. Hirst and Jeffry L. Hirst. Axiom A3 of [Mendelson] p. 35. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Feb-2015.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) → ((¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜑))
Theorem	ax3h 46923	Recover ax-3 8 from hirstL-ax3 46922. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 3-Jul-2015.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) → (𝜓 → 𝜑))
Theorem	aibandbiaiffaiffb 46924	A closed form showing (a implies b and b implies a) same-as (a same-as b). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 3-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜓 → 𝜑)) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	aibandbiaiaiffb 46925	A closed form showing (a implies b and b implies a) implies (a same-as b). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 3-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜓 → 𝜑)) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	notatnand 46926	Do not use. Use intnanr instead. Given not a, there exists a proof for not (a and b). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ¬ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	aistia 46927	Given a is equivalent to ⊤, there exists a proof for a. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 30-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	aisfina 46928	Given a is equivalent to ⊥, there exists a proof for not a. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 30-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ 𝜑
Theorem	bothtbothsame 46929	Given both a, b are equivalent to ⊤, there exists a proof for a is the same as b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bothfbothsame 46930	Given both a, b are equivalent to ⊥, there exists a proof for a is the same as b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	aiffbbtat 46931	Given a is equivalent to b, b is equivalent to ⊤ there exists a proof for a is equivalent to T. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 29-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)
Theorem	aisbbisfaisf 46932	Given a is equivalent to b, b is equivalent to ⊥ there exists a proof for a is equivalent to F. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 30-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)
Theorem	axorbtnotaiffb 46933	Given a is exclusive to b, there exists a proof for (not (a if-and-only-if b)); df-xor 1513 is a closed form of this. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	aiffnbandciffatnotciffb 46934	Given a is equivalent to (not b), c is equivalent to a, there exists a proof for ( not ( c iff b ) ). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	axorbciffatcxorb 46935	Given a is equivalent to (not b), c is equivalent to a. there exists a proof for ( c xor b ). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜒 ⊻ 𝜓)
Theorem	aibnbna 46936	Given a implies b, (not b), there exists a proof for (not a). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 1-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ¬ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ 𝜑
Theorem	aibnbaif 46937	Given a implies b, not b, there exists a proof for a is F. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 1-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ¬ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)
Theorem	aiffbtbat 46938	Given a is equivalent to b, T. is equivalent to b. there exists a proof for a is equivalent to T. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 29-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (⊤ ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)
Theorem	astbstanbst 46939	Given a is equivalent to T., also given that b is equivalent to T, there exists a proof for a and b is equivalent to T. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 29-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ ⊤)
Theorem	aistbistaandb 46940	Given a is equivalent to T., also given that b is equivalent to T, there exists a proof for (a and b). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 9-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Theorem	aisbnaxb 46941	Given a is equivalent to b, there exists a proof for (not (a xor b)). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 28-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)
Theorem	atbiffatnnb 46942	If a implies b, then a implies not not b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 28-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ¬ ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	bisaiaisb 46943	Application of bicom1 with a, b swapped. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ((𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	atbiffatnnbalt 46944	If a implies b, then a implies not not b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 29-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ¬ ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	abnotbtaxb 46945	Assuming a, not b, there exists a proof a-xor-b.) (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.)
⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ ¬ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)
Theorem	abnotataxb 46946	Assuming not a, b, there exists a proof a-xor-b.) (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.)
⊢ ¬ 𝜑    &   ⊢ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)
Theorem	conimpf 46947	Assuming a, not b, and a implies b, there exists a proof that a is false.) (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 28-Aug-2016.)
⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ ¬ 𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)
Theorem	conimpfalt 46948	Assuming a, not b, and a implies b, there exists a proof that a is false.) (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 29-Aug-2016.)
⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ ¬ 𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)
Theorem	aistbisfiaxb 46949	Given a is equivalent to T., Given b is equivalent to F. there exists a proof for a-xor-b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)
Theorem	aisfbistiaxb 46950	Given a is equivalent to F., Given b is equivalent to T., there exists a proof for a-xor-b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)
Theorem	aifftbifffaibif 46951	Given a is equivalent to T., Given b is equivalent to F., there exists a proof for that a implies b is false. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ⊥)
Theorem	aifftbifffaibifff 46952	Given a is equivalent to T., Given b is equivalent to F., there exists a proof for that a iff b is false. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ⊥)
Theorem	atnaiana 46953	Given a, it is not the case a implies a self contradiction. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2020.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ (𝜑 → (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))
Theorem	ainaiaandna 46954	Given a, a implies it is not the case a implies a self contradiction. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2020.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ (𝜑 → (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)))
Theorem	abcdta 46955	Given (((a and b) and c) and d), there exists a proof for a. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 3-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜑
Theorem	abcdtb 46956	Given (((a and b) and c) and d), there exists a proof for b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 3-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜓
Theorem	abcdtc 46957	Given (((a and b) and c) and d), there exists a proof for c. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 3-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜒
Theorem	abcdtd 46958	Given (((a and b) and c) and d), there exists a proof for d. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 3-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜃
Theorem	abciffcbatnabciffncba 46959	Operands in a biconditional expression converted negated. Additionally biconditional converted to show antecedent implies sequent. Closed form. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (¬ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) → ¬ ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	abciffcbatnabciffncbai 46960	Operands in a biconditional expression converted negated. Additionally biconditional converted to show antecedent implies sequent. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜑))    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) → ¬ ((𝜒 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	nabctnabc 46961	not ( a -> ( b /\ c ) ) we can show: not a implies ( b /\ c ). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2020.)
⊢ ¬ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))
Theorem	jabtaib 46962	For when pm3.4 lacks a pm3.4i. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 9-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	onenotinotbothi 46963	From one negated implication it is not the case its nonnegated form and a random others are both true. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 11-Sep-2020.)
⊢ ¬ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜃))
Theorem	twonotinotbothi 46964	From these two negated implications it is not the case their nonnegated forms are both true. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 11-Sep-2020.)
⊢ ¬ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ ¬ (𝜒 → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜃))
Theorem	clifte 46965	show d is the same as an if-else involving a,b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 20-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)    &   ⊢ 𝜃    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)))
Theorem	cliftet 46966	show d is the same as an if-else involving a,b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 20-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)    &   ⊢ 𝜃    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)))
Theorem	clifteta 46967	show d is the same as an if-else involving a,b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 20-Sep-2020.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ 𝜃    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)))
Theorem	cliftetb 46968	show d is the same as an if-else involving a,b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 20-Sep-2020.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ 𝜃    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) ∨ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)))
Theorem	confun 46969	Given the hypotheses there exists a proof for (c implies ( d iff a ) ). (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2020.)
⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜑 → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	confun2 46970	Confun simplified to two propositions. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → ¬ (𝜓 → (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)))    &   ⊢ ((𝜓 → 𝜑) → ((𝜓 → 𝜑) → 𝜑))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜓 → (¬ (𝜓 → (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜓)) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜑)))
Theorem	confun3 46971	Confun's more complex form where both a,d have been "defined". (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜒 → 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ¬ (𝜒 → (𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)))    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → ¬ (𝜒 → (𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)))    &   ⊢ ((𝜒 → 𝜓) → ((𝜒 → 𝜓) → 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜒 → (¬ (𝜒 → (𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜒 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	confun4 46972	An attempt at derivative. Resisted simplest path to a proof. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2020.)
⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒))    &   ⊢ ((𝜒 → 𝜃) → ((𝜑 → 𝜃) ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ (𝜒 → 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ¬ (𝜒 → (𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)))    &   ⊢ 𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜓 → 𝜏))
Theorem	confun5 46973	An attempt at derivative. Resisted simplest path to a proof. Interesting that ch, th, ta, et were all provable. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2020.)
⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒))    &   ⊢ ((𝜒 → 𝜃) → ((𝜑 → 𝜃) ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ (𝜒 → 𝜃))    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ¬ (𝜒 → (𝜒 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)))    &   ⊢ 𝜓    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜒 → (𝜂 ↔ 𝜏))
Theorem	plcofph 46974	Given, a,b and a "definition" for c, c is demonstrated. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 8-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ((((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜑) → (𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))) ∧ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))))    &   ⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜒
Theorem	pldofph 46975	Given, a,b c, d, "definition" for e, e is demonstrated. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 8-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ((𝜒 → 𝜃) ∧ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ∧ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃))))    &   ⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ 𝜓    &   ⊢ 𝜒    &   ⊢ 𝜃    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜏
Theorem	plvcofph 46976	Given, a,b,d, and "definitions" for c, e, f: f is demonstrated. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 8-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ((((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜑) → (𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))) ∧ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))))    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ((𝜒 → 𝜃) ∧ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ∧ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃))))    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜏))    &   ⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ 𝜓    &   ⊢ 𝜃    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜂
Theorem	plvcofphax 46977	Given, a,b,d, and "definitions" for c, e, f, g: g is demonstrated. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 8-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ((((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ 𝜑) → (𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))) ∧ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑))))    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ((𝜒 → 𝜃) ∧ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒) ∧ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃))))    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜏))    &   ⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ 𝜓    &   ⊢ 𝜃    &   ⊢ (𝜁 ↔ ¬ (𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜏))    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜁
Theorem	plvofpos 46978	rh is derivable because ONLY one of ch, th, ta, et is implied by mu. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 11-Sep-2020.)
⊢ (𝜒 ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝜁 ↔ (((((¬ ((𝜇 → 𝜒) ∧ (𝜇 → 𝜃)) ∧ ¬ ((𝜇 → 𝜒) ∧ (𝜇 → 𝜏))) ∧ ¬ ((𝜇 → 𝜒) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜂))) ∧ ¬ ((𝜇 → 𝜃) ∧ (𝜇 → 𝜏))) ∧ ¬ ((𝜇 → 𝜃) ∧ (𝜇 → 𝜂))) ∧ ¬ ((𝜇 → 𝜏) ∧ (𝜇 → 𝜂))))    &   ⊢ (𝜎 ↔ (((𝜇 → 𝜒) ∨ (𝜇 → 𝜃)) ∨ ((𝜇 → 𝜏) ∨ (𝜇 → 𝜂))))    &   ⊢ (𝜌 ↔ (𝜁 ∧ 𝜎))    &   ⊢ 𝜁    &   ⊢ 𝜎    ⇒   ⊢ 𝜌
Theorem	mdandyv0 46979	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	mdandyv1 46980	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	mdandyv2 46981	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	mdandyv3 46982	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	mdandyv4 46983	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	mdandyv5 46984	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	mdandyv6 46985	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	mdandyv7 46986	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊥)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	mdandyv8 46987	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	mdandyv9 46988	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	mdandyv10 46989	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	mdandyv11 46990	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	mdandyv12 46991	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	mdandyv13 46992	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	mdandyv14 46993	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜑) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	mdandyv15 46994	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ph, ps accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 6-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ ⊤)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ ⊤)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	mdandyvr0 46995	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ze, si accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜁)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜎)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜁) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁))
Theorem	mdandyvr1 46996	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ze, si accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜁)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜎)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜎) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁))
Theorem	mdandyvr2 46997	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ze, si accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜁)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜎)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜁) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁))
Theorem	mdandyvr3 46998	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ze, si accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜁)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜎)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜎) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁))
Theorem	mdandyvr4 46999	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ze, si accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜁)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜎)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜁) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁))
Theorem	mdandyvr5 47000	Given the equivalences set in the hypotheses, there exist a proof where ch, th, ta, et match ze, si accordingly. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 7-Sep-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜁)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜎)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜑)    &   ⊢ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜎) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁))