HomeTheorem List (p. 471 of 500)
GIF version.
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > MPE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List
| Home |
Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 471 of 500) | < 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
(1-30900) |
Hilbert Space Explorer
(30901-32423) |
Users' Mathboxes
(32424-49930) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | chnsubseqwl 47001 | A subsequence of a chain has the same length as its indexing sequence. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 22-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ ( < Chain 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐼 ∈ ( < Chain (0..^(♯‘𝑊)))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (♯‘(𝑊 ∘ 𝐼)) = (♯‘𝐼)) | ||
| Theorem | chnsubseq 47002 | An order-preserving subsequence of an ordered chain is itself a chain. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 22-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ ( < Chain 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐼 ∈ ( < Chain (0..^(♯‘𝑊)))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → < Po 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑊 ∘ 𝐼) ∈ ( < Chain 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | chnsuslle 47003 | Length of a subsequence is bounded by the length of original chain. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 30-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑊 ∈ ( < Chain 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐼 ∈ ( < Chain (0..^(♯‘𝑊)))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → < Po 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (♯‘(𝑊 ∘ 𝐼)) ≤ (♯‘𝑊)) | ||
| Theorem | chnerlem1 47004 | In a chain constructed on an equivalence relation, the last element is equivalent to any. This theorem is a translation of chnub 18530 to equivalence relations. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 29-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∼ Er 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ ( ∼ Chain 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐽 ∈ (0..^(♯‘𝐶))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶‘𝐽) ∼ (lastS‘𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | chnerlem2 47005 | Lemma for chner 47007 where the I-th element comes before the J-th. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 29-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∼ Er 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ ( ∼ Chain 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐽 ∈ (0..^(♯‘𝐶))) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐼 ∈ (0..^𝐽)) → (𝐶‘𝐼) ∼ (𝐶‘𝐽)) | ||
| Theorem | chnerlem3 47006 | Lemma for chner 47007- trichotomy of integers within the word's domain. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 29-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∼ Er 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ ( ∼ Chain 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐽 ∈ (0..^(♯‘𝐶))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐼 ∈ (0..^(♯‘𝐶))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐼 ∈ (0..^𝐽) ∨ 𝐽 ∈ (0..^𝐼) ∨ 𝐼 = 𝐽)) | ||
| Theorem | chner 47007 | Any two elements are equivalent in a chain constructed on an equivalence relation. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 29-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → ∼ Er 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 ∈ ( ∼ Chain 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐽 ∈ (0..^(♯‘𝐶))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐼 ∈ (0..^(♯‘𝐶))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶‘𝐼) ∼ (𝐶‘𝐽)) | ||
| Theorem | nthrucw 47008* | Some number sets form a chain of proper subsets. This is rephrasing nthruc 16163 as a statement about chains; the hypothesis sets the ordering relation to be "is a proper subset". The theorem talks about singleton 1, natural numbers, natural-or-zero numbers, integers, rational numbers, algebraic reals (the definition includes complex numbers as algebraic so intersection is taken), real numbers and complex numbers, which are proper subsets in order. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 29-Jan-2026.) |
| ⊢ < = {⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩ ∣ 𝑥 ⊊ 𝑦} ⇒ ⊢ ⟨“{1}ℕℕ0ℤℚ(𝔸 ∩ ℝ)ℝℂ”⟩ ∈ ( < Chain V) | ||
| Theorem | evenwodadd 47009 | 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))) | ||
| Theorem | squeezedltsq 47010 | 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 47011 | 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 47012 | 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 47013 | 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 27018. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 8-Dec-2025.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∗ ∈ (Poly‘ℂ) | ||
| Theorem | tannpoly 47014 | 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 47015 | Sine function is not a polynomial with complex coefficients. Indeed, it has infinitely many zeros but is not constant zero, contrary to fta1 26244. (Contributed by Ender Ting, 10-Dec-2025.) |
| ⊢ ¬ sin ∈ (Poly‘ℂ) | ||
| Theorem | hirstL-ax3 47016 | 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 47017 | Recover ax-3 8 from hirstL-ax3 47016. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 3-Jul-2015.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) → (𝜓 → 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | aibandbiaiffaiffb 47018 | 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 47019 | 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 47020 | 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 47021 | Given a is equivalent to ⊤, there exists a proof for a. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 30-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊤) ⇒ ⊢ 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | aisfina 47022 | Given a is equivalent to ⊥, there exists a proof for not a. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 30-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ⊥) ⇒ ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 | ||
| Theorem | bothtbothsame 47023 | 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 47024 | 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 47025 | 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 47026 | 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 47027 | 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 47028 | 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 47029 | 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 47030 | 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 47031 | 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 47032 | 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 47033 | 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 47034 | 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 47035 | 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 47036 | If a implies b, then a implies not not b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 28-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ¬ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | bisaiaisb 47037 | Application of bicom1 with a, b swapped. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜓 ↔ 𝜑) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | atbiffatnnbalt 47038 | If a implies b, then a implies not not b. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 29-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → ¬ ¬ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | abnotbtaxb 47039 | Assuming a, not b, there exists a proof a-xor-b.) (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ 𝜑 & ⊢ ¬ 𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | abnotataxb 47040 | Assuming not a, b, there exists a proof a-xor-b.) (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 31-Aug-2016.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝜑 & ⊢ 𝜓 ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | conimpf 47041 | 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 47042 | 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 47043 | 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 47044 | 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 47045 | 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 47046 | 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 47047 | 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 47048 | 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 47049 | 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 47050 | 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 47051 | 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 47052 | 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 47053 | 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 47054 | 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 47055 | 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 47056 | For when pm3.4 lacks a pm3.4i. (Contributed by Jarvin Udandy, 9-Sep-2020.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | onenotinotbothi 47057 | 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 47058 | 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 47059 | 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 47060 | 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 47061 | 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 47062 | 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 47063 | 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 47064 | 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 47065 | 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 47066 | 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 47067 | 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 47068 | 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 47069 | 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 47070 | 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 47071 | 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 47072 | 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 47073 | 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 47074 | 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 47075 | 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 47076 | 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 47077 | 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 47078 | 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 47079 | 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 47080 | 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 47081 | 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 47082 | 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 47083 | 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 47084 | 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 47085 | 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 47086 | 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 47087 | 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 47088 | 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 47089 | 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 47090 | 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 47091 | 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 47092 | 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 47093 | 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 47094 | 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)) | ||
| Theorem | mdandyvr6 47095 | 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 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜁) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁)) | ||
| Theorem | mdandyvr7 47096 | 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 ↔ 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜑) ⇒ ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜎) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜁)) | ||
| Theorem | mdandyvr8 47097 | 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 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜁) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜎)) | ||
| Theorem | mdandyvr9 47098 | 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 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜎) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜎)) | ||
| Theorem | mdandyvr10 47099 | 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 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜁) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜎)) | ||
| Theorem | mdandyvr11 47100 | 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 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ ((((𝜒 ↔ 𝜎) ∧ (𝜃 ↔ 𝜎)) ∧ (𝜏 ↔ 𝜁)) ∧ (𝜂 ↔ 𝜎)) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |