| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 56 of 506) | < 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: | (1-31236) |
(31237-32759) |
(32760-50572) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | opthhausdorff0 5501 | Justification theorem for the ordered pair definition of Felix Hausdorff in "Grundzüge der Mengenlehre" ("Basics of Set Theory"), 1914, p. 32: 〈𝐴, 𝐵〉H = {{𝐴, 𝑂}, {𝐵, 𝑇}}. Hausdorff used 1 and 2 instead of 𝑂 and 𝑇, but actually, any two different fixed sets will do (e.g., 𝑂 = ∅ and 𝑇 = {∅}, see 0nep0 5328). Furthermore, Hausdorff demanded that 𝑂 and 𝑇 are both different from 𝐴 as well as 𝐵, which is actually not necessary if all involved classes exist as sets (i.e. are not proper classes), in contrast to opthhausdorff 5500. See df-op 4595 for other ordered pair definitions. (Contributed by AV, 12-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐶 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐷 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝑂 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝑇 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝑂 ≠ 𝑇 ⇒ ⊢ ({{𝐴, 𝑂}, {𝐵, 𝑇}} = {{𝐶, 𝑂}, {𝐷, 𝑇}} ↔ (𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | otsndisj 5502* | The singletons consisting of ordered triples which have distinct third components are disjoint. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 10-Mar-2018.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑌) → Disj 𝑐 ∈ 𝑉 {〈𝐴, 𝐵, 𝑐〉}) | ||
| Theorem | otiunsndisj 5503* | The union of singletons consisting of ordered triples which have distinct first and third components are disjoint. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 10-Mar-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑋 → Disj 𝑎 ∈ 𝑉 ∪ 𝑐 ∈ (𝑊 ∖ {𝑎}){〈𝑎, 𝐵, 𝑐〉}) | ||
| Theorem | iunopeqop 5504* | Implication of an ordered pair being equal to an indexed union of singletons of ordered pairs. (Contributed by AV, 20-Sep-2020.) Remove antecedent. (Revised by Eric Schmidt, 9-May-2026.) (Avoid depending on this detail.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐶 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐷 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 {〈𝑥, 𝐵〉} = 〈𝐶, 𝐷〉 → ∃𝑧 𝐴 = {𝑧}) | ||
| Theorem | iunopeqopOLD 5505* | Obsolete version of iunopeqop 5504 as of 9-May-2026. (Contributed by AV, 20-Sep-2020.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐶 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐷 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ≠ ∅ → (∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 {〈𝑥, 𝐵〉} = 〈𝐶, 𝐷〉 → ∃𝑧 𝐴 = {𝑧})) | ||
| Theorem | brsnop 5506 | Binary relation for an ordered pair singleton. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 23-Sep-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑋{〈𝐴, 𝐵〉}𝑌 ↔ (𝑋 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑌 = 𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | brtp 5507 | A necessary and sufficient condition for two sets to be related under a binary relation which is an unordered triple. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 8-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ 𝑋 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝑌 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝑋{〈𝐴, 𝐵〉, 〈𝐶, 𝐷〉, 〈𝐸, 𝐹〉}𝑌 ↔ ((𝑋 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑌 = 𝐵) ∨ (𝑋 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝑌 = 𝐷) ∨ (𝑋 = 𝐸 ∧ 𝑌 = 𝐹))) | ||
| Theorem | opabidw 5508* | The law of concretion. Special case of Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. Version of opabid 5509 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 14-Apr-1995.) Avoid ax-13 2402. (Revised by GG, 26-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ (〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | opabid 5509 | The law of concretion. Special case of Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use the weaker opabidw 5508 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 14-Apr-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | elopabw 5510* | Membership in a class abstraction of ordered pairs. Weaker version of elopab 5511 with a sethood antecedent, avoiding ax-sep 5256, ax-nul 5268, and ax-pr 5404. Originally a subproof of elopab 5511. (Contributed by SN, 11-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝐴 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∧ 𝜑))) | ||
| Theorem | elopab 5511* | Membership in a class abstraction of ordered pairs. (Contributed by NM, 24-Mar-1998.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝐴 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
| Theorem | rexopabb 5512* | Restricted existential quantification over an ordered-pair class abstraction. (Contributed by AV, 8-Nov-2023.) |
| ⊢ 𝑂 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} & ⊢ (𝑜 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (∃𝑜 ∈ 𝑂 𝜓 ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | vopelopabsb 5513* | The law of concretion in terms of substitutions. Version of opelopabsb 5514 with set variables. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2002.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) Remove unnecessary commutation. (Revised by SN, 1-Sep-2024.) |
| ⊢ (〈𝑧, 𝑤〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑧 / 𝑥][𝑤 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | opelopabsb 5514* | The law of concretion in terms of substitutions. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2002.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.) |
| ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥][𝐵 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | brabsb 5515* | The law of concretion in terms of substitutions. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-2008.) |
| ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥][𝐵 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | opelopabt 5516* | Closed theorem form of opelopab 5527. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ∧ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊)) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | opelopabga 5517* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | brabga 5518* | The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | opelopab2a 5519* | Ordered pair membership in an ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ 𝜑)} ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | opelopaba 5520* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | braba 5521* | The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by NM, 19-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | brab2d 5522* | Expressing that two sets are related by a binary relation which is expressed as a class abstraction of ordered pairs. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 4-May-2025.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝑈 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑉) ∧ 𝜓)}) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵)) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑈 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉) ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | opelopabg 5523* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by NM, 28-May-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | brabg 5524* | The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1999.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | opelopabgf 5525* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. This version of opelopabg 5523 uses bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 8-Jul-2018.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜒 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | opelopab2 5526* | Ordered pair membership in an ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2007.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ 𝜑)} ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
| Theorem | opelopab 5527* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-1995.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | brab 5528* | The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1999.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | opelopabaf 5529* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. This version of opelopab 5527 uses bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓 & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜓) | ||
| Theorem | opelopabf 5530* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. This version of opelopab 5527 uses bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by NM, 19-Dec-2008.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜒 & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒) | ||
| Theorem | ssopab2 5531 | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-May-2013.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓}) | ||
| Theorem | ssopab2bw 5532* | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. Version of ssopab2b 5534 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2402. (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1996.) Avoid ax-13 2402. (Revised by GG, 26-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | eqopab2bw 5533* | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction equality and biconditional. Version of eqopab2b 5537 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2402. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Jan-2017.) Avoid ax-13 2402. (Revised by GG, 26-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | ssopab2b 5534 | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use the weaker ssopab2bw 5532 when possible. (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1996.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | ssopab2i 5535 | Inference of ordered pair abstraction subclass from implication. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | ssopab2dv 5536* | Inference of ordered pair abstraction subclass from implication. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jan-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} ⊆ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜒}) | ||
| Theorem | eqopab2b 5537 | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction equality and biconditional. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2402. Use the weaker eqopab2bw 5533 when possible. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Jan-2017.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | opabn0 5538 | Nonempty ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 10-Oct-2007.) |
| ⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ≠ ∅ ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | opab0 5539 | Empty ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by AV, 29-Oct-2021.) |
| ⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = ∅ ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | csbopab 5540* | Move substitution into a class abstraction. Version of csbopabw 5541 without a sethood antecedent but depending on more axioms. (Contributed by NM, 6-Aug-2007.) (Revised by NM, 23-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌{〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | csbopabw 5541* | Move substitution into a class abstraction. Version of csbopab 5540 with a sethood antecedent but depending on fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 6-Aug-2007.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌{〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑}) | ||
| Theorem | csbmpt12 5542* | Move substitution into a maps-to notation. (Contributed by AV, 26-Sep-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝑦 ∈ 𝑌 ↦ 𝑍) = (𝑦 ∈ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝑌 ↦ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝑍)) | ||
| Theorem | csbmpt2 5543* | Move substitution into the second part of a maps-to notation. (Contributed by AV, 26-Sep-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝑦 ∈ 𝑌 ↦ 𝑍) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝑌 ↦ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝑍)) | ||
| Theorem | iunopab 5544* | Move indexed union inside an ordered-pair class abstraction. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Feb-2015.) Avoid ax-sep 5256, ax-nul 5268, ax-pr 5404. (Revised by SN, 11-Nov-2024.) |
| ⊢ ∪ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | elopabr 5545* | Membership in an ordered-pair class abstraction defined by a binary relation. (Contributed by AV, 16-Feb-2021.) (Proof shortened by SN, 11-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑥𝑅𝑦} → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑅) | ||
| Theorem | elopabran 5546* | Membership in an ordered-pair class abstraction defined by a restricted binary relation. (Contributed by AV, 16-Feb-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝜓)} → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑅) | ||
| Theorem | rbropapd 5547* | Properties of a pair in an extended binary relation. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 30-Oct-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 = {〈𝑓, 𝑝〉 ∣ (𝑓𝑊𝑝 ∧ 𝜓)}) & ⊢ ((𝑓 = 𝐹 ∧ 𝑝 = 𝑃) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐹 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝑃 ∈ 𝑌) → (𝐹𝑀𝑃 ↔ (𝐹𝑊𝑃 ∧ 𝜒)))) | ||
| Theorem | rbropap 5548* | Properties of a pair in a restricted binary relation 𝑀 expressed as an ordered-pair class abstraction: 𝑀 is the binary relation 𝑊 restricted by the condition 𝜓. (Contributed by AV, 31-Jan-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 = {〈𝑓, 𝑝〉 ∣ (𝑓𝑊𝑝 ∧ 𝜓)}) & ⊢ ((𝑓 = 𝐹 ∧ 𝑝 = 𝑃) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝑃 ∈ 𝑌) → (𝐹𝑀𝑃 ↔ (𝐹𝑊𝑃 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
| Theorem | 2rbropap 5549* | Properties of a pair in a restricted binary relation 𝑀 expressed as an ordered-pair class abstraction: 𝑀 is the binary relation 𝑊 restricted by the conditions 𝜓 and 𝜏. (Contributed by AV, 31-Jan-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 = {〈𝑓, 𝑝〉 ∣ (𝑓𝑊𝑝 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜏)}) & ⊢ ((𝑓 = 𝐹 ∧ 𝑝 = 𝑃) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ ((𝑓 = 𝐹 ∧ 𝑝 = 𝑃) → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝑃 ∈ 𝑌) → (𝐹𝑀𝑃 ↔ (𝐹𝑊𝑃 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃))) | ||
| Theorem | 0nelopab 5550 | The empty set is never an element in an ordered-pair class abstraction. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 5-Nov-2017.) Reduce axiom usage and shorten proof. (Revised by GG, 3-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ ¬ ∅ ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | brabv 5551 | If two classes are in a relationship given by an ordered-pair class abstraction, the classes are sets. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 5-Nov-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋{〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑}𝑌 → (𝑋 ∈ V ∧ 𝑌 ∈ V)) | ||
| Theorem | pwin 5552 | The power class of the intersection of two classes is the intersection of their power classes. Exercise 4.12(j) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) = (𝒫 𝐴 ∩ 𝒫 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | pwssun 5553 | The power class of the union of two classes is a subset of the union of their power classes, iff one class is a subclass of the other. Exercise 4.12(l) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴) ↔ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ⊆ (𝒫 𝐴 ∪ 𝒫 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | pwun 5554 | The power class of the union of two classes equals the union of their power classes, iff one class is a subclass of the other. Part of Exercise 7(b) of [Enderton] p. 28. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴) ↔ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) = (𝒫 𝐴 ∪ 𝒫 𝐵)) | ||
| Syntax | cid 5555 | Extend the definition of a class to include the identity relation. |
| class I | ||
| Definition | df-id 5556* | Define the identity relation. Definition 9.15 of [Quine] p. 64. For example, 5 I 5 and ¬ 4 I 5 (ex-id 30751). (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ I = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑥 = 𝑦} | ||
| Theorem | dfid4 5557 | The identity function expressed using maps-to notation. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 15-Dec-2017.) |
| ⊢ I = (𝑥 ∈ V ↦ 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | dfid2 5558 |
Alternate definition of the identity relation. Instance of dfid3 5559 not
requiring auxiliary axioms. (Contributed by NM, 15-Mar-2007.) Reduce
axiom usage. (Revised by GG, 4-Nov-2024.) (Proof shortened by BJ,
5-Nov-2024.)
Use df-id 5556 instead to make the semantics of the constructor df-opab 5173 clearer. (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ I = {〈𝑥, 𝑥〉 ∣ 𝑥 = 𝑥} | ||
| Theorem | dfid3 5559 |
A stronger version of df-id 5556 that does not require 𝑥 and 𝑦 to
be disjoint. This is not the definition since, in order to pass our
definition soundness test, a definition has to have disjoint dummy
variables, see conventions 30717. The proof can be instructive in
showing
how disjoint variable conditions may be eliminated, a task that is not
necessarily obvious. (Contributed by NM, 5-Feb-2008.) (Revised by
Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.)
Use df-id 5556 instead to make the semantics of the constructor df-opab 5173 clearer (in usages, 𝑥, 𝑦 will typically be dummy variables, so can be assumed disjoint). (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ I = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑥 = 𝑦} | ||
| Syntax | cep 5560 | Extend class notation to include the membership relation. |
| class E | ||
| Definition | df-eprel 5561* | Define the membership relation (also called "epsilon relation" since it is sometimes denoted by the lowercase Greek letter "epsilon"). Similar to Definition 6.22 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 30. The membership relation and the membership predicate agree, that is, (𝐴 E 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵), when 𝐵 is a set (see epelg 5562). Thus, ⊢ 5 E {1, 5} (ex-eprel 30750). (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ E = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦} | ||
| Theorem | epelg 5562 | The membership relation and the membership predicate agree when the "containing" class is a set. General version of epel 5564 and closed form of epeli 5563. Definition 1.6 of [Schloeder] p. 1. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 27-Mar-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 14-Jul-2023.) |
| ⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 E 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | epeli 5563 | The membership relation and the membership predicate agree when the "containing" class is a set. Inference associated with epelg 5562. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 11-Apr-2012.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 E 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | epel 5564 | The membership relation and the membership predicate agree when the "containing" class is a setvar. Definition 1.6 of [Schloeder] p. 1. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.) Replace the first setvar variable with a class variable. (Revised by BJ, 13-Sep-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 E 𝑥 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | 0sn0ep 5565 | An example for the membership relation. (Contributed by AV, 19-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ ∅ E {∅} | ||
| Theorem | epn0 5566 | The membership relation is nonempty. (Contributed by AV, 19-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ E ≠ ∅ | ||
We have not yet defined relations (df-rel 5668), but here we introduce a few related notions we will use to develop ordinals. The class variable 𝑅 is no different from other class variables, but it reminds us that typically it represents what we will later call a "relation". | ||
| Syntax | wpo 5567 | Extend wff notation to include the strict partial ordering predicate. Read: "𝑅 is a partial order on 𝐴". |
| wff 𝑅 Po 𝐴 | ||
| Syntax | wor 5568 | Extend wff notation to include the strict total ordering predicate. Read: "𝑅 orders 𝐴". |
| wff 𝑅 Or 𝐴 | ||
| Definition | df-po 5569* | Define the strict partial order predicate. Definition of [Enderton] p. 168. The expression 𝑅 Po 𝐴 means 𝑅 is a partial order on 𝐴. For example, < Po ℝ is true, while ≤ Po ℝ is false (ex-po 30752). (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (¬ 𝑥𝑅𝑥 ∧ ((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧))) | ||
| Definition | df-so 5570* | Define the strict complete (linear) order predicate. The expression 𝑅 Or 𝐴 is true if relationship 𝑅 orders 𝐴. For example, < Or ℝ is true (ltso 11289). Equivalent to Definition 6.19(1) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 29. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∨ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦𝑅𝑥))) | ||
| Theorem | poss 5571 | Subset theorem for the partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → (𝑅 Po 𝐵 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | poeq1 5572 | Equality theorem for partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Po 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | poeq2 5573 | Equality theorem for partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Po 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | poeq12d 5574 | Equality deduction for partial orderings. (Contributed by Matthew House, 10-Sep-2025.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 = 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Po 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | nfpo 5575 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for partial orders. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑅 Po 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | nfso 5576 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for total orders. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑅 Or 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | pocl 5577 | Characteristic properties of a partial order in class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) Reduce axiom usage and shorten proof. (Revised by GG, 3-Oct-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 Po 𝐴 → ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴) → (¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵 ∧ ((𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷)))) | ||
| Theorem | ispod 5578* | Sufficient conditions for a partial order. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2014.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝑥𝑅𝑥) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | swopolem 5579* | Perform the substitutions into the strict weak ordering law. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Dec-2014.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 → (𝑥𝑅𝑧 ∨ 𝑧𝑅𝑦))) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑋 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑍 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑋𝑅𝑌 → (𝑋𝑅𝑍 ∨ 𝑍𝑅𝑌))) | ||
| Theorem | swopo 5580* | A strict weak order is a partial order. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑦𝑅𝑧 → ¬ 𝑧𝑅𝑦)) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 → (𝑥𝑅𝑧 ∨ 𝑧𝑅𝑦))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | poirr 5581 | A partial order is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | potr 5582 | A partial order is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | po2nr 5583 | A partial order has no 2-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | po3nr 5584 | A partial order has no 3-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷 ∧ 𝐷𝑅𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | po2ne 5585 | Two sets related by a partial order are not equal. (Contributed by AV, 13-Mar-2023.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝑉 ∧ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉) ∧ 𝐴𝑅𝐵) → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | po0 5586 | Any relation is a partial order on the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ 𝑅 Po ∅ | ||
| Theorem | pofun 5587* | The inverse image of a partial order is a partial order. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 18-Jun-2011.) |
| ⊢ 𝑆 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑋𝑅𝑌} & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑋 = 𝑌) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐵 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑋 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝑆 Po 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | sopo 5588 | A strict linear order is a strict partial order. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 Or 𝐴 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | soss 5589 | Subset theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → (𝑅 Or 𝐵 → 𝑅 Or 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | soeq1 5590 | Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Or 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | soeq2 5591 | Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Or 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | soeq12d 5592 | Equality deduction for total orderings. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 19-Jan-2015.) (Proof shortened by Matthew House, 10-Sep-2025.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 = 𝑆) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Or 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | sonr 5593 | A strict order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-1995.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | sotr 5594 | A strict order relation is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | sotrd 5595 | Transitivity law for strict orderings, deduction form. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 24-Nov-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Or 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑍 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋𝑅𝑌) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑌𝑅𝑍) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋𝑅𝑍) | ||
| Theorem | solin 5596 | A strict order relation is linear (satisfies trichotomy). (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∨ 𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | so2nr 5597 | A strict order relation has no 2-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | so3nr 5598 | A strict order relation has no 3-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷 ∧ 𝐷𝑅𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | sotric 5599 | A strict order relation satisfies strict trichotomy. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-1996.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ↔ ¬ (𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵))) | ||
| Theorem | sotrieq 5600 | Trichotomy law for strict order relation. (Contributed by NM, 9-Apr-1996.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝐵 = 𝐶 ↔ ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵))) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |