| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 53 of 507) | < 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: | (1-31307) |
(31308-32830) |
(32831-50693) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12f 5201 | 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 5202* | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jan-2017.) Remove dependency on ax-10 2179, ax-12 2216. (Revised by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12dv 5203* | 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 2179, ax-12 2216. (Revised by SN and GG, 1-Dec-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐶) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq12 5204* | 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 5205* | 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 5206* | 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 5207 | 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 | mpteq2da 5208 | 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 5209* | Slightly more general equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 25-Apr-2012.) Remove dependency on ax-10 2179. (Revised by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | mpteq2dv 5210* | 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 5211 | 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 5212 | 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 5213 | 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 5214* | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 20-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | nfmpt1 5215 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by FL, 17-Feb-2008.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmptf 5216* | 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 2407. See cbvmptfg 5217 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 5217 | 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 2407. See cbvmptf 5216 for a version with more disjoint variable conditions, but not requiring ax-13 2407. (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 5218* | 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 2407. See cbvmptg 5219 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 5219* | 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 2407. See cbvmpt 5218 for a version with more disjoint variable conditions, but not requiring ax-13 2407. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐶 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmptv 5220* | 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 5221 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 | cbvmptvg 5221* | 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 2407. See cbvmptv 5220 for a version with more disjoint variable conditions, but not requiring ax-13 2407. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Feb-2013.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝐵 = 𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | mptv 5222* | Function with universal domain in maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ V ↦ 𝐵) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑦 = 𝐵} | ||
| Syntax | wtr 5223 | Extend wff notation to include transitive classes. Notation from [TakeutiZaring] p. 35. |
| wff Tr 𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-tr 5224 | Define the transitive class predicate. Not to be confused with a transitive relation (see cotr 6117). Definition of [Enderton] p. 71 extended to arbitrary classes. For alternate definitions, see dftr2 5225 (which is suggestive of the word "transitive"), dftr2c 5226, dftr3 5228, dftr4 5229, dftr5 5227, and (when 𝐴 is a set) unisuc 6449. 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 5225* | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. Exercise 7 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 40. Using dftr2c 5226 instead may avoid dependences on ax-11 2195. (Contributed by NM, 24-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦((𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dftr2c 5226* | Variant of dftr2 5225 with commuted quantifiers, useful for shortening proofs and avoiding ax-11 2195. (Contributed by BTernaryTau, 28-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑦∀𝑥((𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | dftr5 5227* | An alternate way of defining a transitive class. Definition 1.1 of [Schloeder] p. 1. (Contributed by NM, 20-Mar-2004.) Avoid ax-11 2195. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 28-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ (Tr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | dftr3 5228* | 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 5229 | 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 5230 | Equality theorem for the transitive class predicate. (Contributed by NM, 17-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (Tr 𝐴 ↔ Tr 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | trel 5231 | 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 5232 | 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 5233 | 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 | trun 5234 | The union of transitive classes is transitive. (Contributed by Eric Schmidt, 19-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ ((Tr 𝐴 ∧ Tr 𝐵) → Tr (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | trin 5235 | The intersection of transitive classes is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 9-May-1994.) |
| ⊢ ((Tr 𝐴 ∧ Tr 𝐵) → Tr (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | tr0 5236 | The empty set is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 16-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ Tr ∅ | ||
| Theorem | trv 5237 | The universe is transitive. (Contributed by NM, 14-Sep-2003.) |
| ⊢ Tr V | ||
| Theorem | triun 5238 | 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 5239* | 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 5240 | 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 5241* | 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 5242 | 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 5243* |
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 5251, where you can
find some further remarks. A slightly more compact version is shown as
axrep2 5246. A quite different variant is zfrep6 5255, which if used in
place of ax-rep 5243 would also require that the Separation Scheme
axsep 5261
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 9893 and the Boundedness Axiom bnd 9894. Many developments of set theory distinguish the uses of Replacement from uses of the weaker axioms of Separation axsep 5261, Null Set axnul 5273, and Pairing axpr 5403, 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 5262, ax-nul 5274, and ax-pr 5409 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 5244* | 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 5243 → axrep1 5244 → axrep2 5246 → axrepnd 10597 → zfcndrep 10617 = ax-rep 5243. (Contributed by NM, 19-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) Remove dependency on ax-13 2407. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | axreplem 5245* | Lemma for axrep2 5246 and axrep3 5247. (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 5246* | 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 2407. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | axrep3 5247* | Axiom of Replacement slightly strengthened from axrep2 5246; 𝑤 may occur free in 𝜑. (Contributed by NM, 2-Jan-1997.) Remove dependency on ax-13 2407. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(∃𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝑧 = 𝑦) → ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ∀𝑦𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | axrep4v 5248* | Version of axrep4 5249 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 5249* | 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 5250* | Obsolete version of axrep4 5249 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 5251* | 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 5252* | A condensed form of ax-rep 5243. (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 5253* | Obsolete version of axrep6 5252 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 | replem 5254* | A lemma for variants of the axiom of replacement: if we can form the set of images of the functional relation, then we can also form a set containing all its images. The converse requires the axiom of separation. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑦𝜑 ∧ ∃𝑤∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 ↔ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 𝜑)) → ∃𝑤∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | zfrep6 5255* | A version of the Axiom of Replacement. Normally 𝜑 would have free variables 𝑥 and 𝑦. Axiom 6 of [Kunen] p. 12. The Separation Scheme ax-sep 5262 cannot be derived from this version and must be stated as a separate axiom in an axiom system (such as Kunen's) that uses this version in place of our ax-rep 5243. (Contributed by NM, 10-Oct-2003.) Shorten proof and reduce axiom dependencies. (Revised by BJ, 5-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∃!𝑦𝜑 → ∃𝑤∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑤 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | axrep6g 5256* | axrep6 5252 in class notation. It is equivalent to both ax-rep 5243 and abrexexg 7967, providing a direct link between the two. (Contributed by SN, 11-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∀𝑥∃*𝑦𝜓) → {𝑦 ∣ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜓} ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | zfrepclf 5257* | 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 5258* | 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 5259* | 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 5260* | A more general version axsepg 5263 of the axiom scheme of separation ax-sep 5262 derived from the axiom scheme of replacement ax-rep 5243 (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 2156 to ax-13 2407. (Revised by SN, 25-Sep-2023.) Use ax-sep 5262 instead (or axsepg 5263 if the extra generality is needed). (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | axsep 5261* | Axiom scheme of separation ax-sep 5262 derived from the axiom scheme of replacement ax-rep 5243. The statement is identical to that of ax-sep 5262, and therefore shows that ax-sep 5262 is redundant when ax-rep 5243 is allowed. See ax-sep 5262 for more information. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.) Use ax-sep 5262 instead. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Axiom | ax-sep 5262* |
Axiom scheme of separation. This is an axiom scheme of Zermelo and
Zermelo-Fraenkel set theories.
It was derived as axsep 5261 above and is therefore redundant in ZF set theory, which contains ax-rep 5243 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 3746. 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 sepg 5264, 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 notsep 5339 shows (showing the necessity of that condition in sepgi 5265, hence in sepg 5264 and ax-sep 5262). Scheme Sep of [BellMachover] p. 463. (Contributed by NM, 11-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | axsepg 5263* | A more general version of the axiom scheme of separation ax-sep 5262, 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 5262 with no additional set theory axioms. Note that it was also derived from ax-rep 5243 but without ax-sep 5262 as axsepgfromrep 5260. (Contributed by NM, 10-Dec-2006.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) Remove dependency on ax-12 2216 and ax-13 2407 and shorten proof. (Revised by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sepg 5264* | Version of the axiom of separation where the "containing set" is a class variable and the sethood assumption is in the antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) Put sepgi 5265 in closed form. (Revised by BJ, 2-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | sepgi 5265* | Inference associated with sepg 5264. The requirement that 𝑦 not occur in 𝜑 is necessary, as notsep 5339 shows. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Revised by BJ, 14-Jul-2026.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | zfausclOLD 5266* | Obsolete version of sepgi 5265 as of 14-Jul-2026. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sepexlem 5267* | Lemma for sepex 5268. Use sepex 5268 instead. (Contributed by Matthew House, 19-Sep-2025.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦) → ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | sepex 5268* | Convert implication to equivalence within an existence statement using the Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) ax-sep 5262. 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 5269* | Convert implication to equivalence within an existence statement using the Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) ax-sep 5262. Inference associated with sepex 5268. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) Generalize conclusion, extract closed form, and avoid ax-9 2156. (Revised by Matthew House, 19-Sep-2025.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝜑 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦) ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑧∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | bm1.3iiOLD 5270* | Obsolete version of sepexi 5269 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 5271* | Derive ax6v 2001 (a weakened version of ax-6 2000 where 𝑥 and 𝑦 must be distinct), from Separation ax-sep 5262 and Extensionality ax-ext 2738. See ax6 2419 for the derivation of ax-6 2000 from ax6v 2001. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2013.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 | ||
| Theorem | axnulALT 5272* | Alternate proof of axnul 5273, proved from propositional calculus, ax-gen 1828, ax-4 1842, sp 2222, and ax-rep 5243. To check this, replace sp 2222 with the obsolete axiom ax-c5 39697 in the proof of axnulALT 5272 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 5273* |
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 5262. 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 2743).
This proof, suggested by Jeff Hoffman, uses only ax-4 1842 and ax-gen 1828 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 5262 implies the existence of at least one set. Note that Kunen's version of ax-sep 5262 (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 5272 for a proof directly from ax-rep 5243. This theorem should not be referenced by any proof. Instead, use ax-nul 5274 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 5274* | The Null Set Axiom of ZF set theory. It was derived as axnul 5273 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 5275 | 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 5274. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ ∅ ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | al0ssb 5276* | 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 5277 | Alternate proof of sseli 3936 illustrating the use of the weak deduction theorem to prove it from the inference sselii 3937. (Contributed by NM, 24-Aug-2018.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 → 𝐶 ∈ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | csbexg 5278 | 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 5279 | 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 5280 | A version of unisn 4896 without the 𝐴 ∈ V hypothesis. (Contributed by Stefan Allan, 14-Mar-2006.) |
| ⊢ ∪ {𝐴} ∈ {∅, 𝐴} | ||
| Theorem | exnelv 5281* | For any set 𝑥, there is a set not contained in 𝑥. The proof is based on Russell's paradox. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) Remove use of ax-12 2216 and ax-13 2407. (Revised by BJ, 31-May-2019.) Extract from nalset 5282. (Revised by Matthew House, 12-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | nalset 5282* | No set contains all sets. Theorem 41 of [Suppes] p. 30. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) Extract exnelv 5281. (Revised by Matthew House, 12-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | nalsetOLD 5283* | Obsolete version of nalset 5282 as of 12-Apr-2026. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | vneqv 5284 | The universal class is not equal to any setvar. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2005.) Extract from vnex 5285 and shorten proof. (Revised by BJ, 25-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝑥 = V | ||
| Theorem | vnex 5285 | The universal class does not exist as a set. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2005.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 25-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = V | ||
| Theorem | vnexOLD 5286 | Obsolete proof of vnex 5285 as of 25-Apr-2026. (Contributed by NM, 4-Jul-2005.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = V | ||
| Theorem | nvel 5287 | The universal class does not belong to any class. (Contributed by FL, 31-Dec-2006.) Prove it without using vprc 5288, which is then proved as an instance of it. (Revised by BJ, 1-May-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ V ∈ 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | vprc 5288 | 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.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 1-May-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ V ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | vprcOLD 5289 | Obsolete proof of vprc 5288, obsolete as of 1-May-2026. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ V ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | nvelOLD 5290 | Obsolete proof of nvel 5287, obsolete as of 1-May-2026. (Contributed by FL, 31-Dec-2006.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ V ∈ 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | inex1 5291 | 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 5292 | Separation Scheme (Aussonderung) using class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐴) ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | inex1g 5293 | Closed-form, generalized Separation Scheme. (Contributed by NM, 7-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | inex2g 5294 | Sufficient condition for an intersection to be a set. Commuted form of inex1g 5293. (Contributed by Peter Mazsa, 19-Dec-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐵 ∩ 𝐴) ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | ssexg 5295 | A subclass of a set is a set. Exercise 3 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22 (generalized). (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 18-Jul-2026.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | ssex 5296 | A subclass of a set is a set. Exercise 3 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. This is one way to express the Axiom of Separation ax-sep 5262 (a.k.a. Subset Axiom). (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 18-Jul-2026.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | ssexOLD 5297 | Obsolete version of ssex 5296 as of 18-Jul-2026. (Contributed by NM, 27-Apr-1994.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | ssexi 5298 | A subclass of a set is a set. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-1993.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | ssexgOLD 5299 | Obsolete version of ssexg 5295 as of 18-Jul-2026. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1994.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | ssexd 5300 | A subclass of a set is a set. Deduction form of ssexg 5295. (Contributed by David Moews, 1-May-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ V) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |