| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 53 of 497) | < Previous Next > | |
| Bad symbols? Try the
GIF version. |
||
|
Mirrors > Metamath Home Page > MPE Home Page > Theorem List Contents > Recent Proofs This page: Page List |
||
| Color key: | (1-30904) |
(30905-32427) |
(32428-49649) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | cbvopab1s 5201* | Change first bound variable in an ordered-pair class abstraction, using explicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-2003.) |
| ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑧, 𝑦〉 ∣ [𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | cbvopab1v 5202* | Rule used to change the first bound variable in an ordered pair abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-2003.) (Proof shortened by Eric Schmidt, 4-Apr-2007.) Reduce axiom usage. (Revised by GG, 17-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑧, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | cbvopab1vOLD 5203* | Obsolete version of cbvopab1v 5202 as of 17-Nov-2024. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-2003.) (Proof shortened by Eric Schmidt, 4-Apr-2007.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑧, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | cbvopab2v 5204* | Rule used to change the second bound variable in an ordered pair abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 2-Sep-1999.) |
| ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑧 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑥, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | unopab 5205 | Union of two ordered pair class abstractions. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2002.) |
| ⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ∪ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓}) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)} | ||
| Syntax | cmpt 5206 | Extend the definition of a class to include maps-to notation for defining a function via a rule. |
| class (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) | ||
| Definition | df-mpt 5207* | Define maps-to notation for defining a function via a rule. Read as "the function which maps 𝑥 (in 𝐴) to 𝐵(𝑥)". The class expression 𝐵 is the value of the function at 𝑥 and normally contains the variable 𝑥. An example is the square function for complex numbers, (𝑥 ∈ ℂ ↦ (𝑥↑2)). Similar to the definition of mapping in [ChoquetDD] p. 2. (Contributed by NM, 17-Feb-2008.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵)} | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12da 5208 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 23-Oct-2021.) Remove dependency on ax-10 2142. (Revised by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12df 5209 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. Compare mpteq12dv 5212. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 8-Aug-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.) (Proof shortened by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12f 5210 | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥 𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 = 𝐷) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12dva 5211* | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jan-2017.) Remove dependency on ax-10 2142, ax-12 2178. (Revised by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12dv 5212* | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 24-Aug-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) Remove dependency on ax-10 2142, ax-12 2178. (Revised by SN and GG, 1-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12 5213* | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 = 𝐷) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq1 5214* | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) (Proof shortened by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq1d 5215* | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 11-Jun-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq1i 5216 | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 17-Aug-2020.) Remove all disjoint variable conditions. (Revised by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq1iOLD 5217* | Obsolete version of mpteq1i 5216 as of 15-Nov-2024. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 17-Aug-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq2da 5218 | Slightly more general equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by FL, 14-Sep-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) (Proof shortened by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq2dva 5219* | Slightly more general equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 25-Apr-2012.) Remove dependency on ax-10 2142. (Revised by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq2dv 5220* | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 23-Aug-2014.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq2ia 5221 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) (Proof shortened by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq2i 5222 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐶 ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12i 5223 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 27-Oct-2010.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐶 & ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐷 ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | nfmpt 5224* | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 20-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | nfmpt1 5225 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by FL, 17-Feb-2008.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmptf 5226* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. This version has bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2011.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 9-Mar-2017.) Add disjoint variable condition to avoid ax-13 2377. See cbvmptfg 5227 for a less restrictive version requiring more axioms. (Revised by GG, 17-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐶 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmptfg 5227 | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. This version has bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2377. See cbvmptf 5226 for a version with more disjoint variable conditions, but not requiring ax-13 2377. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2011.) (Revised by Thierry Arnoux, 9-Mar-2017.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐶 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmpt 5228* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. This version has bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2011.) Add disjoint variable condition to avoid ax-13 2377. See cbvmptg 5229 for a less restrictive version requiring more axioms. (Revised by GG, 17-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐶 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmptg 5229* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. This version has bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2377. See cbvmpt 5228 for a version with more disjoint variable conditions, but not requiring ax-13 2377. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐶 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmptv 5230* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Feb-2013.) Add disjoint variable condition to avoid auxiliary axioms . See cbvmptvg 5232 for a less restrictive version requiring more axioms. (Revised by GG, 17-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmptvOLD 5231* | Obsolete version of cbvmptv 5230 as of 17-Nov-2024. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Feb-2013.) Add disjoint variable condition to avoid ax-13 2377. See cbvmptvg 5232 for a less restrictive version requiring more axioms. (Revised by GG, 17-Jan-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmptvg 5232* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2377. See cbvmptv 5230 for a version with more disjoint variable conditions, but not requiring ax-13 2377. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Feb-2013.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | mptv 5233* | Function with universal domain in maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ V ↦ 𝐵) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑦 = 𝐵} | ||
| Syntax | wtr 5234 | Extend wff notation to include transitive classes. Notation from [TakeutiZaring] p. 35. |
| wff Tr 𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-tr 5235 | Define the transitive class predicate. Not to be confused with a transitive relation (see cotr 6104). Definition of [Enderton] p. 71 extended to arbitrary classes. For alternate definitions, see dftr2 5236 (which is suggestive of the word "transitive"), dftr2c 5237, dftr3 5240, dftr4 5241, dftr5 5238, and (when 𝐴 is a set) unisuc 6438. The term "complete" is used instead of "transitive" in Definition 3 of [Suppes] p. 130. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∪ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dftr2 5236* | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. Exercise 7 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 40. Using dftr2c 5237 instead may avoid dependences on ax-11 2158. (Contributed by NM, 24-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dftr2c 5237* | Variant of dftr2 5236 with commuted quantifiers, useful for shortening proofs and avoiding ax-11 2158. (Contributed by BTernaryTau, 28-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑦∀𝑥((𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dftr5 5238* | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. Definition 1.1 of [Schloeder] p. 1. (Contributed by NM, 20-Mar-2004.) Avoid ax-11 2158. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 28-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dftr5OLD 5239* | Obsolete version of dftr5 5238 as of 28-Dec-2024. (Contributed by NM, 20-Mar-2004.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dftr3 5240* | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. Definition 7.1 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 35. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dftr4 5241 | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. Definition of [Enderton] p. 71. (Contributed by NM, 29-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝒫 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | treq 5242 | Equality theorem for the transitive class predicate. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (Tr 𝐴 ↔ Tr 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | trel 5243 | In a transitive class, the membership relation is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 19-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 → ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | trel3 5244 | In a transitive class, the membership relation is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 19-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 → ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐷 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | trss 5245 | An element of a transitive class is a subset of the class. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by JJ, 26-Jul-2021.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 → (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | trin 5246 | The intersection of transitive classes is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 9-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ ((Tr 𝐴 ∧ Tr 𝐵) → Tr (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | tr0 5247 | The empty set is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 16-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ Tr ∅ | ||
| Theorem | trv 5248 | The universe is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 14-Sep-2003.) |
| ⊢ Tr V | ||
| Theorem | triun 5249 | An indexed union of a class of transitive sets is transitive. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Nov-2014.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 Tr 𝐵 → Tr ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | truni 5250* | 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 5251 | 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 5252* | 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 5253 | 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) | ||
| Axiom | ax-rep 5254* |
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 6630). 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 5262, where you can
find some further remarks. A slightly more compact version is shown as
axrep2 5257. A quite different variant is zfrep6 7958, which if used in
place of ax-rep 5254 would also require that the Separation Scheme
axsep 5270
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 9910 and the Boundedness Axiom bnd 9911. Many developments of set theory distinguish the uses of Replacement from uses of the weaker axioms of Separation axsep 5270, Null Set axnul 5280, and Pairing axpr 5402, 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 5271, ax-nul 5281, and ax-pr 5407 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 5255* | 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 5254 → axrep1 5255 → axrep2 5257 → axrepnd 10613 → zfcndrep 10633 = ax-rep 5254. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) Remove dependency on ax-13 2377. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | axreplem 5256* | Lemma for axrep2 5257 and axrep3 5258. (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 5257* | 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 2377. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | axrep3 5258* | Axiom of Replacement slightly strengthened from axrep2 5257; 𝑤 may occur free in 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-1997.) Remove dependency on ax-13 2377. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | axrep4v 5259* | Version of axrep4 5260 with a disjoint variable condition, requiring fewer axioms. (Contributed by Matthew House, 18-Sep-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 = 𝑧) → ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | axrep4 5260* | A more traditional version of the Axiom of Replacement. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Matthew House, 18-Sep-2025.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 = 𝑧) → ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | axrep4OLD 5261* | Obsolete version of axrep4 5260 as of 18-Sep-2025. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1994.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ (∀𝑥∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 = 𝑧) → ∃𝑧∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | axrep5 5262* | 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 5263* | A condensed form of ax-rep 5254. (Contributed by SN, 18-Sep-2023.) (Proof shortened by Matthew House, 18-Sep-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑤∃*𝑧𝜑 → ∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | axrep6OLD 5264* | Obsolete version of axrep6 5263 as of 18-Sep-2025. (Contributed by SN, 18-Sep-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑤∃*𝑧𝜑 → ∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ ∃𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | axrep6g 5265* | axrep6 5263 in class notation. It is equivalent to both ax-rep 5254 and abrexexg 7964, providing a direct link between the two. (Contributed by SN, 11-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) → {𝑦 ∣ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓} ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | zfrepclf 5266* | 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 5267* | 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 5268* | 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 | ||
| Theorem | axsepgfromrep 5269* | A more general version axsepg 5272 of the axiom scheme of separation ax-sep 5271 derived from the axiom scheme of replacement ax-rep 5254 (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 2119 to ax-13 2377. (Revised by SN, 25-Sep-2023.) Use ax-sep 5271 instead (or axsepg 5272 if the extra generality is needed). (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | axsep 5270* | Axiom scheme of separation ax-sep 5271 derived from the axiom scheme of replacement ax-rep 5254. The statement is identical to that of ax-sep 5271, and therefore shows that ax-sep 5271 is redundant when ax-rep 5254 is allowed. See ax-sep 5271 for more information. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.) Use ax-sep 5271 instead. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Axiom | ax-sep 5271* |
Axiom scheme of separation. This is an axiom scheme of Zermelo and
Zermelo-Fraenkel set theories.
It was derived as axsep 5270 above and is therefore redundant in ZF set theory, which contains ax-rep 5254 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 3768. 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 5273, 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 5338 shows (showing the necessity of that condition in zfauscl 5273). Scheme Sep of [BellMachover] p. 463. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | axsepg 5272* | A more general version of the axiom scheme of separation ax-sep 5271, 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 5271 with no additional set theory axioms. Note that it was also derived from ax-rep 5254 but without ax-sep 5271 as axsepgfromrep 5269. (Contributed by NM, 10-Dec-2006.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) Remove dependency on ax-12 2178 and ax-13 2377 and shorten proof. (Revised by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | zfauscl 5273* |
Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using a class variable. To derive this
from ax-sep 5271, we invoke the Axiom of Extensionality
(indirectly via
vtocl 3542), 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 5338 shows. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sepexlem 5274* | Lemma for sepex 5275. Use sepex 5275 instead. (Contributed by Matthew House, 19-Sep-2025.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦) → ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sepex 5275* | Convert implication to equivalence within an existence statement using the Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) ax-sep 5271. Similar to Theorem 1.3(ii) of [BellMachover] p. 463. (Contributed by Matthew House, 19-Sep-2025.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦) → ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sepexi 5276* | Convert implication to equivalence within an existence statement using the Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) ax-sep 5271. Inference associated with sepex 5275. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) Generalize conclusion, extract closed form, and avoid ax-9 2119. (Revised by Matthew House, 19-Sep-2025.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bm1.3iiOLD 5277* | Obsolete version of sepexi 5276 as of 18-Sep-2025. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥) ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | ax6vsep 5278* | Derive ax6v 1968 (a weakened version of ax-6 1967 where 𝑥 and 𝑦 must be distinct), from Separation ax-sep 5271 and Extensionality ax-ext 2708. See ax6 2389 for the derivation of ax-6 1967 from ax6v 1968. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | axnulALT 5279* | Alternate proof of axnul 5280, proved from propositional calculus, ax-gen 1795, ax-4 1809, sp 2184, and ax-rep 5254. To check this, replace sp 2184 with the obsolete axiom ax-c5 38906 in the proof of axnulALT 5279 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 5280* |
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 5271. 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 2713).
This proof, suggested by Jeff Hoffman, uses only ax-4 1809 and ax-gen 1795 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 5271 implies the existence of at least one set. Note that Kunen's version of ax-sep 5271 (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 5279 for a proof directly from ax-rep 5254. This theorem should not be referenced by any proof. Instead, use ax-nul 5281 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 5281* | The Null Set Axiom of ZF set theory. It was derived as axnul 5280 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 5282 | 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 5281. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ ∅ ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | al0ssb 5283* | 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 5284 | Alternate proof of sseli 3959 illustrating the use of the weak deduction theorem to prove it from the inference sselii 3960. (Contributed by NM, 24-Aug-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | csbexg 5285 | 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 5286 | 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 5287 | A version of unisn 4907 without the 𝐴 ∈ V hypothesis. (Contributed by Stefan Allan, 14-Mar-2006.) |
| ⊢ ∪ {𝐴} ∈ {∅, 𝐴} | ||
| Theorem | nalset 5288* | No set contains all sets. Theorem 41 of [Suppes] p. 30. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) Remove use of ax-12 2178 and ax-13 2377. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | vnex 5289 | The universal class does not exist as a set. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2005.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = V | ||
| Theorem | vprc 5290 | 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 5291 | The universal class does not belong to any class. (Contributed by FL, 31-Dec-2006.) |
| ⊢ ¬ V ∈ 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | inex1 5292 | 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 5293 | Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐴) ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | inex1g 5294 | Closed-form, generalized Separation Scheme. (Contributed by NM, 7-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | inex2g 5295 | Sufficient condition for an intersection to be a set. Commuted form of inex1g 5294. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Dec-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐵 ∩ 𝐴) ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | ssex 5296 | 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 5271 (a.k.a. Subset Axiom). (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | ssexi 5297 | The subset of a set is also a set. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | ssexg 5298 | 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 5299 | A subclass of a set is a set. Deduction form of ssexg 5298. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | abexd 5300* | Conditions for a class abstraction to be a set, deduction form. (Contributed by AV, 19-Apr-2025.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {𝑥 ∣ 𝜓} ∈ V) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |