P. 53 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 5201-5300   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	truni 5201*	The union of a class of transitive sets is transitive. Exercise 5(a) of [Enderton] p. 73. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 21-Feb-2011.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2014.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝑥 → Tr ∪ 𝐴)
Theorem	triin 5202	An indexed intersection of a class of transitive sets is transitive. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝐵 → Tr ∩ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵)
Theorem	trint 5203*	The intersection of a class of transitive sets is transitive. Exercise 5(b) of [Enderton] p. 73. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 25-Feb-2011.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 3-Oct-2022.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝑥 → Tr ∩ 𝐴)
Theorem	trintss 5204	Any nonempty transitive class includes its intersection. Exercise 3 in [TakeutiZaring] p. 44 (which mistakenly does not include the nonemptiness hypothesis). (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 3-Mar-2011.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 14-Nov-2011.)
⊢ ((Tr 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ≠ ∅) → ∩ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐴)
2.2  ZF Set Theory - add the Axiom of Replacement
2.2.1  Introduce the Axiom of Replacement
Axiom	ax-rep 5205*	Axiom of Replacement. An axiom scheme of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. Axiom 5 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 19. It tells us that the image of any set under a function is also a set (see the variant funimaex 6505). Although 𝜑 may be any wff whatsoever, this axiom is useful (i.e. its antecedent is satisfied) when we are given some function and 𝜑 encodes the predicate "the value of the function at 𝑤 is 𝑧". Thus, 𝜑 will ordinarily have free variables 𝑤 and 𝑧- think of it informally as 𝜑(𝑤, 𝑧). We prefix 𝜑 with the quantifier ∀𝑦 in order to "protect" the axiom from any 𝜑 containing 𝑦, thus allowing us to eliminate any restrictions on 𝜑. Another common variant is derived as axrep5 5211, where you can find some further remarks. A slightly more compact version is shown as axrep2 5208. A quite different variant is zfrep6 7771, which if used in place of ax-rep 5205 would also require that the Separation Scheme axsep 5217 be stated as a separate axiom. There is a very strong generalization of Replacement that doesn't demand function-like behavior of 𝜑. Two versions of this generalization are called the Collection Principle cp 9580 and the Boundedness Axiom bnd 9581. Many developments of set theory distinguish the uses of Replacement from uses of the weaker axioms of Separation axsep 5217, Null Set axnul 5224, and Pairing axpr 5346, all of which we derive from Replacement. In order to make it easier to identify the uses of those redundant axioms, we restate them as Axioms ax-sep 5218, ax-nul 5225, and ax-pr 5347 below the theorems that prove them. (Contributed by NM, 23-Dec-1993.)
⊢ (∀𝑤∃𝑦∀𝑧(∀𝑦𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑤(𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑)))
Theorem	axrep1 5206*	The version of the Axiom of Replacement used in the Metamath Solitaire applet https://us.metamath.org/mmsolitaire/mms.html. Equivalence is shown via the path ax-rep 5205 → axrep1 5206 → axrep2 5208 → axrepnd 10281 → zfcndrep 10301 = ax-rep 5205. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) Remove dependency on ax-13 2372. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	axreplem 5207*	Lemma for axrep2 5208 and axrep3 5209. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Aug-2022.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (∃𝑢(𝜑 → ∀𝑣(𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑤(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ 𝜒))) ↔ ∃𝑢(𝜑 → ∀𝑣(𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑤(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝜒)))))
Theorem	axrep2 5208*	Axiom of Replacement expressed with the fewest number of different variables and without any restrictions on 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 15-Aug-2003.) Remove dependency on ax-13 2372. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑)))
Theorem	axrep3 5209*	Axiom of Replacement slightly strengthened from axrep2 5208; 𝑤 may occur free in 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-1997.) Remove dependency on ax-13 2372. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑)))
Theorem	axrep4 5210*	A more traditional version of the Axiom of Replacement. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1994.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 = 𝑧) → ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	axrep5 5211*	Axiom of Replacement (similar to Axiom Rep of [BellMachover] p. 463). The antecedent tells us 𝜑 is analogous to a "function" from 𝑥 to 𝑦 (although it is not really a function since it is a wff and not a class). In the consequent we postulate the existence of a set 𝑧 that corresponds to the "image" of 𝜑 restricted to some other set 𝑤. The hypothesis says 𝑧 must not be free in 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 14-Oct-2016.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 → ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 = 𝑧)) → ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	axrep6 5212*	A condensed form of ax-rep 5205. (Contributed by SN, 18-Sep-2023.)
⊢ (∀𝑤∃*𝑧𝜑 → ∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 𝜑))
Theorem	zfrepclf 5213*	An inference based on the Axiom of Replacement. Typically, 𝜑 defines a function from 𝑥 to 𝑦. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 = 𝑧))    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	zfrep3cl 5214*	An inference based on the Axiom of Replacement. Typically, 𝜑 defines a function from 𝑥 to 𝑦. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 = 𝑧))    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	zfrep4 5215*	A version of Replacement using class abstractions. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.)
⊢ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝜓 → 𝑦 = 𝑧))    ⇒   ⊢ {𝑦 ∣ ∃𝑥(𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)} ∈ V
2.2.2  Derive the Axiom of Separation
Theorem	axsepgfromrep 5216*	A more general version axsepg 5219 of the axiom scheme of separation ax-sep 5218 derived from the axiom scheme of replacement ax-rep 5205 (and first-order logic). The extra generality consists in the absence of a disjoint variable condition on 𝑧, 𝜑 (that is, variable 𝑧 may occur in formula 𝜑). See linked statements for more information. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.) Remove dependencies on ax-9 2118 to ax-13 2372. (Revised by SN, 25-Sep-2023.) Use ax-sep 5218 instead (or axsepg 5219 if the extra generality is needed). (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	axsep 5217*	Axiom scheme of separation ax-sep 5218 derived from the axiom scheme of replacement ax-rep 5205. The statement is identical to that of ax-sep 5218, and therefore shows that ax-sep 5218 is redundant when ax-rep 5205 is allowed. See ax-sep 5218 for more information. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.) Use ax-sep 5218 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑))
Axiom	ax-sep 5218*	Axiom scheme of separation. This is an axiom scheme of Zermelo and Zermelo-Fraenkel set theories. It was derived as axsep 5217 above and is therefore redundant in ZF set theory, which contains ax-rep 5205 as an axiom (contrary to Zermelo set theory). We state it as a separate axiom here so that some of its uses can be identified more easily. Some textbooks present the axiom scheme of separation as a separate axiom scheme in order to show that much of set theory can be derived without the stronger axiom scheme of replacement (which is not part of Zermelo set theory). The axiom scheme of separation is a weak form of Frege's axiom scheme of (unrestricted) comprehension, in that it conditions it with the condition 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧, so that it asserts the existence of a collection only if it is smaller than some other collection 𝑧 that already exists. This prevents Russell's paradox ru 3710. In some texts, this scheme is called "Aussonderung" (German for "separation") or "Subset Axiom". The variable 𝑥 can occur in the formula 𝜑, which in textbooks is often written 𝜑(𝑥). To specify this in the Metamath language, we omit the distinct variable condition ($d) that 𝑥 not occur in 𝜑. For a version using a class variable, see zfauscl 5220, which requires the axiom of extensionality as well as the axiom scheme of separation for its derivation. If we omit the requirement that 𝑦 not occur in 𝜑, we can derive a contradiction, as notzfaus 5280 shows (showing the necessity of that condition in zfauscl 5220). Scheme Sep of [BellMachover] p. 463. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	axsepg 5219*	A more general version of the axiom scheme of separation ax-sep 5218, where variable 𝑧 can also occur (in addition to 𝑥) in formula 𝜑, which can therefore be thought of as 𝜑(𝑥, 𝑧). This version is derived from the more restrictive ax-sep 5218 with no additional set theory axioms. Note that it was also derived from ax-rep 5205 but without ax-sep 5218 as axsepgfromrep 5216. (Contributed by NM, 10-Dec-2006.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) Remove dependency on ax-12 2173 and ax-13 2372 and shorten proof. (Revised by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	zfauscl 5220*	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using a class variable. To derive this from ax-sep 5218, we invoke the Axiom of Extensionality (indirectly via vtocl 3488), which is needed for the justification of class variable notation. If we omit the requirement that 𝑦 not occur in 𝜑, we can derive a contradiction, as notzfaus 5280 shows. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bm1.3ii 5221*	Convert implication to equivalence using the Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) ax-sep 5218. Similar to Theorem 1.3(ii) of [BellMachover] p. 463. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	ax6vsep 5222*	Derive ax6v 1973 (a weakened version of ax-6 1972 where 𝑥 and 𝑦 must be distinct), from Separation ax-sep 5218 and Extensionality ax-ext 2709. See ax6 2384 for the derivation of ax-6 1972 from ax6v 1973. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦
2.2.3  Derive the Null Set Axiom
Theorem	axnulALT 5223*	Alternate proof of axnul 5224, proved from propositional calculus, ax-gen 1799, ax-4 1813, sp 2178, and ax-rep 5205. To check this, replace sp 2178 with the obsolete axiom ax-c5 36824 in the proof of axnulALT 5223 and type the Metamath program "MM> SHOW TRACE_BACK axnulALT / AXIOMS" command. (Contributed by Jeff Hoffman, 3-Feb-2008.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	axnul 5224*	The Null Set Axiom of ZF set theory: there exists a set with no elements. Axiom of Empty Set of [Enderton] p. 18. In some textbooks, this is presented as a separate axiom; here we show it can be derived from Separation ax-sep 5218. This version of the Null Set Axiom tells us that at least one empty set exists, but does not tell us that it is unique - we need the Axiom of Extensionality to do that (see nulmo 2714). This proof, suggested by Jeff Hoffman, uses only ax-4 1813 and ax-gen 1799 from predicate calculus, which are valid in "free logic" i.e. logic holding in an empty domain (see Axiom A5 and Rule R2 of [LeBlanc] p. 277). Thus, our ax-sep 5218 implies the existence of at least one set. Note that Kunen's version of ax-sep 5218 (Axiom 3 of [Kunen] p. 11) does not imply the existence of a set because his is universally closed, i.e., prefixed with universal quantifiers to eliminate all free variables. His existence is provided by a separate axiom stating ∃𝑥𝑥 = 𝑥 (Axiom 0 of [Kunen] p. 10). See axnulALT 5223 for a proof directly from ax-rep 5205. This theorem should not be referenced by any proof. Instead, use ax-nul 5225 below so that the uses of the Null Set Axiom can be more easily identified. (Contributed by Jeff Hoffman, 3-Feb-2008.) (Revised by NM, 4-Feb-2008.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥
Axiom	ax-nul 5225*	The Null Set Axiom of ZF set theory. It was derived as axnul 5224 above and is therefore redundant, but we state it as a separate axiom here so that its uses can be identified more easily. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2003.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	0ex 5226	The Null Set Axiom of ZF set theory: the empty set exists. Corollary 5.16 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 20. For the unabbreviated version, see ax-nul 5225. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.)
⊢ ∅ ∈ V
Theorem	al0ssb 5227*	The empty set is the unique class which is a subclass of any set. (Contributed by AV, 24-Aug-2022.)
⊢ (∀𝑦 𝑋 ⊆ 𝑦 ↔ 𝑋 = ∅)
Theorem	sseliALT 5228	Alternate proof of sseli 3913 illustrating the use of the weak deduction theorem to prove it from the inference sselii 3914. (Contributed by NM, 24-Aug-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵)
Theorem	csbexg 5229	The existence of proper substitution into a class. (Contributed by NM, 10-Nov-2005.) (Revised by NM, 17-Aug-2018.)
⊢ (∀𝑥 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵 ∈ V)
Theorem	csbex 5230	The existence of proper substitution into a class. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2007.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 29-Jun-2011.) (Revised by NM, 17-Aug-2018.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵 ∈ V
Theorem	unisn2 5231	A version of unisn 4858 without the 𝐴 ∈ V hypothesis. (Contributed by Stefan Allan, 14-Mar-2006.)
⊢ ∪ {𝐴} ∈ {∅, 𝐴}
2.2.4  Theorems requiring subset and intersection existence
Theorem	nalset 5232*	No set contains all sets. Theorem 41 of [Suppes] p. 30. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) Remove use of ax-12 2173 and ax-13 2372. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.)
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	vnex 5233	The universal class does not exist as a set. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2005.)
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = V
Theorem	vprc 5234	The universal class is not a member of itself (and thus is not a set). Proposition 5.21 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 21; our proof, however, does not depend on the Axiom of Regularity. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.)
⊢ ¬ V ∈ V
Theorem	nvel 5235	The universal class does not belong to any class. (Contributed by FL, 31-Dec-2006.)
⊢ ¬ V ∈ 𝐴
Theorem	inex1 5236	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using class notation. Compare Exercise 4 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V
Theorem	inex2 5237	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐴) ∈ V
Theorem	inex1g 5238	Closed-form, generalized Separation Scheme. (Contributed by NM, 7-Apr-1995.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V)
Theorem	inex2g 5239	Sufficient condition for an intersection to be a set. Commuted form of inex1g 5238. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Dec-2018.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐵 ∩ 𝐴) ∈ V)
Theorem	ssex 5240	The subset of a set is also a set. Exercise 3 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. This is one way to express the Axiom of Separation ax-sep 5218 (a.k.a. Subset Axiom). (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	ssexi 5241	The subset of a set is also a set. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-1993.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V
Theorem	ssexg 5242	The subset of a set is also a set. Exercise 3 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22 (generalized). (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1994.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	ssexd 5243	A subclass of a set is a set. Deduction form of ssexg 5242. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	prcssprc 5244	The superclass of a proper class is a proper class. (Contributed by AV, 27-Dec-2020.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐴 ∉ V) → 𝐵 ∉ V)
Theorem	sselpwd 5245	Elementhood to a power set. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 18-May-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵)
Theorem	difexg 5246	Existence of a difference. (Contributed by NM, 26-May-1998.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵) ∈ V)
Theorem	difexi 5247	Existence of a difference, inference version of difexg 5246. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 3-Mar-2021.) (Revised by AV, 26-Mar-2021.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵) ∈ V
Theorem	difexd 5248	Existence of a difference. (Contributed by SN, 16-Jul-2024.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵) ∈ V)
Theorem	zfausab 5249*	Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) in terms of a class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 8-Jun-1994.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)} ∈ V
Theorem	rabexg 5250*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 23-Oct-1999.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V)
Theorem	rabex 5251*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jul-1996.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V
Theorem	rabexd 5252*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction, deduction form of rabex2 5253. (Contributed by AV, 16-Jul-2019.)
⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜓}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ V)
Theorem	rabex2 5253*	Separation Scheme in terms of a restricted class abstraction. (Contributed by AV, 16-Jul-2019.) (Revised by AV, 26-Mar-2021.)
⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜓}    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V
Theorem	rab2ex 5254*	A class abstraction based on a class abstraction based on a set is a set. (Contributed by AV, 16-Jul-2019.) (Revised by AV, 26-Mar-2021.)
⊢ 𝐵 = {𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜓}    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V
Theorem	elssabg 5255*	Membership in a class abstraction involving a subset. Unlike elabg 3600, 𝐴 does not have to be a set. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-2006.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜑)} ↔ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝜓)))
Theorem	intex 5256	The intersection of a nonempty class exists. Exercise 5 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 44 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-2002.)
⊢ (𝐴 ≠ ∅ ↔ ∩ 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	intnex 5257	If a class intersection is not a set, it must be the universe. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jul-2005.)
⊢ (¬ ∩ 𝐴 ∈ V ↔ ∩ 𝐴 = V)
Theorem	intexab 5258	The intersection of a nonempty class abstraction exists. (Contributed by NM, 21-Oct-2003.)
⊢ (∃𝑥𝜑 ↔ ∩ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V)
Theorem	intexrab 5259	The intersection of a nonempty restricted class abstraction exists. (Contributed by NM, 21-Oct-2003.)
⊢ (∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ ∩ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V)
Theorem	iinexg 5260*	The existence of a class intersection. 𝑥 is normally a free-variable parameter in 𝐵, which should be read 𝐵(𝑥). (Contributed by FL, 19-Sep-2011.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → ∩ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ V)
Theorem	intabs 5261*	Absorption of a redundant conjunct in the intersection of a class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jul-2005.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = ∩ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (∩ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜓} ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ ∩ {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)} = ∩ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	inuni 5262*	The intersection of a union ∪ 𝐴 with a class 𝐵 is equal to the union of the intersections of each element of 𝐴 with 𝐵. (Contributed by FL, 24-Mar-2007.)
⊢ (∪ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) = ∪ {𝑥 ∣ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 = (𝑦 ∩ 𝐵)}
Theorem	elpw2g 5263	Membership in a power class. Theorem 86 of [Suppes] p. 47. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-2000.)
⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵))
Theorem	elpw2 5264	Membership in a power class. Theorem 86 of [Suppes] p. 47. (Contributed by NM, 11-Oct-2007.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)
Theorem	elpwi2 5265	Membership in a power class. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 3-Mar-2021.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 26-May-2024.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵
Theorem	elpwi2OLD 5266	Obsolete version of elpwi2 5265 as of 26-May-2024. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 3-Mar-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝐵
Theorem	pwnss 5267	The power set of a set is never a subset. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 22-Feb-2015.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ¬ 𝒫 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐴)
Theorem	pwne 5268	No set equals its power set. The sethood antecedent is necessary; compare pwv 4833. (Contributed by NM, 17-Nov-2008.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 23-Dec-2016.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝒫 𝐴 ≠ 𝐴)
Theorem	difelpw 5269	A difference is an element of the power set of its minuend. (Contributed by AV, 9-Oct-2023.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵) ∈ 𝒫 𝐴)
Theorem	rabelpw 5270*	A restricted class abstraction is an element of the power set of its restricting set. (Contributed by AV, 9-Oct-2023.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ 𝒫 𝐴)
2.2.5  Theorems requiring empty set existence
Theorem	class2set 5271*	Construct, from any class 𝐴, a set equal to it when the class exists and equal to the empty set when the class is proper. This theorem shows that the constructed set always exists. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-2003.)
⊢ {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝐴 ∈ V} ∈ V
Theorem	class2seteq 5272*	Equality theorem based on class2set 5271. (Contributed by NM, 13-Dec-2005.) (Proof shortened by Raph Levien, 30-Jun-2006.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝐴 ∈ V} = 𝐴)
Theorem	0elpw 5273	Every power class contains the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2007.)
⊢ ∅ ∈ 𝒫 𝐴
Theorem	pwne0 5274	A power class is never empty. (Contributed by NM, 3-Sep-2018.)
⊢ 𝒫 𝐴 ≠ ∅
Theorem	0nep0 5275	The empty set and its power set are not equal. (Contributed by NM, 23-Dec-1993.)
⊢ ∅ ≠ {∅}
Theorem	0inp0 5276	Something cannot be equal to both the null set and the power set of the null set. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ (𝐴 = ∅ → ¬ 𝐴 = {∅})
Theorem	unidif0 5277	The removal of the empty set from a class does not affect its union. (Contributed by NM, 22-Mar-2004.)
⊢ ∪ (𝐴 ∖ {∅}) = ∪ 𝐴
Theorem	eqsnuniex 5278	If a class is equal to the singleton of its union, then its union exists. (Contributed by BTernaryTau, 24-Sep-2024.)
⊢ (𝐴 = {∪ 𝐴} → ∪ 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	iin0 5279*	An indexed intersection of the empty set, with a nonempty index set, is empty. (Contributed by NM, 20-Oct-2005.)
⊢ (𝐴 ≠ ∅ ↔ ∩ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∅ = ∅)
Theorem	notzfaus 5280*	In the Separation Scheme zfauscl 5220, we require that 𝑦 not occur in 𝜑 (which can be generalized to "not be free in"). Here we show special cases of 𝐴 and 𝜑 that result in a contradiction if that requirement is not met. (Contributed by NM, 8-Feb-2006.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 18-Nov-2023.)
⊢ 𝐴 = {∅}    &   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦)    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	intv 5281	The intersection of the universal class is empty. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2008.)
⊢ ∩ V = ∅
Theorem	axpweq 5282*	Two equivalent ways to express the Power Set Axiom. Note that ax-pow 5283 is not used by the proof. When ax-pow 5283 is assumed and 𝐴 is a set, both sides of the biconditional hold. In ZF, both sides hold if and only if 𝐴 is a set (see pwexr 7593). (Contributed by NM, 22-Jun-2009.)
⊢ (𝒫 𝐴 ∈ V ↔ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥))
2.3  ZF Set Theory - add the Axiom of Power Sets
2.3.1  Introduce the Axiom of Power Sets
Axiom	ax-pow 5283*	Axiom of Power Sets. An axiom of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. It states that a set 𝑦 exists that includes the power set of a given set 𝑥 i.e. contains every subset of 𝑥. The variant axpow2 5285 uses explicit subset notation. A version using class notation is pwex 5298. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑧(∀𝑤(𝑤 ∈ 𝑧 → 𝑤 ∈ 𝑥) → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)
Theorem	zfpow 5284*	Axiom of Power Sets expressed with the fewest number of different variables. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-2003.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)
Theorem	axpow2 5285*	A variant of the Axiom of Power Sets ax-pow 5283 using subset notation. Problem in [BellMachover] p. 466. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-2006.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝑧 ⊆ 𝑥 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)
Theorem	axpow3 5286*	A variant of the Axiom of Power Sets ax-pow 5283. For any set 𝑥, there exists a set 𝑦 whose members are exactly the subsets of 𝑥 i.e. the power set of 𝑥. Axiom Pow of [BellMachover] p. 466. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jun-2006.)
⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝑧 ⊆ 𝑥 ↔ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦)
Theorem	el 5287*	Every set is an element of some other set. See elALT 5352 for a shorter proof using more axioms. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jan-2002.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
⊢ ∃𝑦 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦
Theorem	dtru 5288*	At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). Note that we may not substitute the same variable for both 𝑥 and 𝑦 (as indicated by the distinct variable requirement), for otherwise we would contradict stdpc6 2032. This theorem is proved directly from set theory axioms (no set theory definitions) and does not use ax-ext 2709 or ax-sep 5218. See dtruALT 5306 for a shorter proof using these axioms. The proof makes use of dummy variables 𝑧 and 𝑤 which do not appear in the final theorem. They must be distinct from each other and from 𝑥 and 𝑦. In other words, if we were to substitute 𝑥 for 𝑧 throughout the proof, the proof would fail. (Contributed by NM, 7-Nov-2006.) Avoid ax-13 2372. (Revised by Gino Giotto, 5-Sep-2023.) Avoid ax-12 2173. (Revised by Rohan Ridenour, 9-Oct-2024.)
⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦
Theorem	dtrucor 5289*	Corollary of dtru 5288. This example illustrates the danger of blindly trusting the standard Deduction Theorem without accounting for free variables: the theorem form of this deduction is not valid, as shown by dtrucor2 5290. (Contributed by NM, 27-Jun-2002.)
⊢ 𝑥 = 𝑦    ⇒   ⊢ 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦
Theorem	dtrucor2 5290	The theorem form of the deduction dtrucor 5289 leads to a contradiction, as mentioned in the "Wrong!" example at mmdeduction.html#bad 5289. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 20-Oct-2007.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜑)
Theorem	dvdemo1 5291*	Demonstration of a theorem that requires the setvar variables 𝑥 and 𝑦 to be disjoint (but without any other disjointness conditions, and in particular, none on 𝑧). That theorem bundles the theorems (⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥) with 𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧 disjoint), often called its "principal instance", and the two "degenerate instances" (⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥) with 𝑥, 𝑦 disjoint) and (⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥) with 𝑥, 𝑦 disjoint). Compare with dvdemo2 5292, which has the same principal instance and one common degenerate instance but crucially differs in the other degenerate instance. See https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmset.html#distinct 5292 for details on the "disjoint variable" mechanism. (The verb "bundle" to express this phenomenon was introduced by Raph Levien.) Note that dvdemo1 5291 is partially bundled, in that the pairs of setvar variables 𝑥, 𝑧 and 𝑦, 𝑧 need not be disjoint, and in spite of that, its proof does not require ax-11 2156 nor ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 1-Dec-2006.) (Revised by BJ, 13-Jan-2024.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥)
Theorem	dvdemo2 5292*	Demonstration of a theorem that requires the setvar variables 𝑥 and 𝑧 to be disjoint (but without any other disjointness conditions, and in particular, none on 𝑦). That theorem bundles the theorems (⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥) with 𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧 disjoint), often called its "principal instance", and the two "degenerate instances" (⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑥 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥) with 𝑥, 𝑧 disjoint) and (⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑧 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥) with 𝑥, 𝑧 disjoint). Compare with dvdemo1 5291, which has the same principal instance and one common degenerate instance but crucially differs in the other degenerate instance. See https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmset.html#distinct 5291 for details on the "disjoint variable" mechanism. Note that dvdemo2 5292 is partially bundled, in that the pairs of setvar variables 𝑥, 𝑦 and 𝑦, 𝑧 need not be disjoint, and in spite of that, its proof does not require any of the auxiliary axioms ax-10 2139, ax-11 2156, ax-12 2173, ax-13 2372. (Contributed by NM, 1-Dec-2006.) (Revised by BJ, 13-Jan-2024.)
⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥)
Theorem	nfnid 5293	A setvar variable is not free from itself. This theorem is not true in a one-element domain, as illustrated by the use of dtru 5288 in its proof. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Oct-2016.)
⊢ ¬ Ⅎ𝑥𝑥
Theorem	nfcvb 5294	The "distinctor" expression ¬ ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦, stating that 𝑥 and 𝑦 are not the same variable, can be written in terms of Ⅎ in the obvious way. This theorem is not true in a one-element domain, because then Ⅎ𝑥𝑦 and ∀𝑥𝑥 = 𝑦 will both be true. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Oct-2016.) Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2372. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (Ⅎ𝑥𝑦 ↔ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
Theorem	vpwex 5295	Power set axiom: the powerclass of a set is a set. Axiom 4 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 17. (Contributed by NM, 30-Oct-2003.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) Revised to prove pwexg 5296 from vpwex 5295. (Revised by BJ, 10-Aug-2022.)
⊢ 𝒫 𝑥 ∈ V
Theorem	pwexg 5296	Power set axiom expressed in class notation, with the sethood requirement as an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 30-Oct-2003.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝒫 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	pwexd 5297	Deduction version of the power set axiom. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 26-Jun-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝒫 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	pwex 5298	Power set axiom expressed in class notation. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ 𝒫 𝐴 ∈ V
Theorem	pwel 5299	Quantitative version of pwexg 5296: the powerset of an element of a class is an element of the double powerclass of the union of that class. Exercise 10 of [Enderton] p. 26. (Contributed by NM, 13-Jan-2007.) Remove use of ax-nul 5225 and ax-pr 5347 and shorten proof. (Revised by BJ, 13-Apr-2024.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝒫 𝐴 ∈ 𝒫 𝒫 ∪ 𝐵)
Theorem	abssexg 5300*	Existence of a class of subsets. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jul-2006.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.)
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∣ (𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)} ∈ V)