| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 75 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: | (1-30845) |
(30846-32368) |
(32369-49617) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | riotaclb 7401* | Bidirectional closure of restricted iota when domain is not empty. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Dec-2016.) (Revised by NM, 13-Sep-2018.) |
| ⊢ (¬ ∅ ∈ 𝐴 → (∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑 ↔ (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑) ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | riotarab 7402* | Restricted iota of a restricted abstraction. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 8-Aug-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (℩𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜓}𝜒) = (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝜑 ∧ 𝜒)) | ||
| Syntax | co 7403 | Extend class notation to include the value of an operation 𝐹 (such as +) for two arguments 𝐴 and 𝐵. Note that the syntax is simply three class symbols in a row surrounded by parentheses. Since operation values are the only possible class expressions consisting of three class expressions in a row surrounded by parentheses, the syntax is unambiguous. (For an example of how syntax could become ambiguous if we are not careful, see the comment in cneg 11465.) |
| class (𝐴𝐹𝐵) | ||
| Syntax | coprab 7404 | Extend class notation to include class abstraction (class builder) of nested ordered pairs. |
| class {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Syntax | cmpo 7405 | Extend the definition of a class to include maps-to notation for defining an operation via a rule. |
| class (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Definition | df-ov 7406 | Define the value of an operation. Definition of operation value in [Enderton] p. 79. Note that the syntax is simply three class expressions in a row bracketed by parentheses. There are no restrictions of any kind on what those class expressions may be, although only certain kinds of class expressions - a binary operation 𝐹 and its arguments 𝐴 and 𝐵- will be useful for proving meaningful theorems. For example, if class 𝐹 is the operation + and arguments 𝐴 and 𝐵 are 3 and 2, the expression (3 + 2) can be proved to equal 5 (see 3p2e5 12389). This definition is well-defined, although not very meaningful, when classes 𝐴 and/or 𝐵 are proper classes (i.e. are not sets); see ovprc1 7442 and ovprc2 7443. On the other hand, we often find uses for this definition when 𝐹 is a proper class, such as +o in oav 8521. 𝐹 is normally equal to a class of nested ordered pairs of the form defined by df-oprab 7407. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = (𝐹‘〈𝐴, 𝐵〉) | ||
| Definition | df-oprab 7407* | Define the class abstraction (class builder) of a collection of nested ordered pairs (for use in defining operations). This is a special case of Definition 4.16 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 14. Normally 𝑥, 𝑦, and 𝑧 are distinct, although the definition doesn't strictly require it. See df-ov 7406 for the value of an operation. The brace notation is called "class abstraction" by Quine; it is also called a "class builder" in the literature. The value of an operation given by a class abstraction is given by ovmpo 7565. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {𝑤 ∣ ∃𝑥∃𝑦∃𝑧(𝑤 = 〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∧ 𝜑)} | ||
| Definition | df-mpo 7408* | Define maps-to notation for defining an operation via a rule. Read as "the operation defined by the map from 𝑥, 𝑦 (in 𝐴 × 𝐵) to 𝐶(𝑥, 𝑦)". An extension of df-mpt 5202 for two arguments. (Contributed by NM, 17-Feb-2008.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵) ∧ 𝑧 = 𝐶)} | ||
| Theorem | oveq 7409 | Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹 = 𝐺 → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = (𝐴𝐺𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq1 7410 | Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq2 7411 | Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐶𝐹𝐴) = (𝐶𝐹𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq12 7412 | Equality theorem for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jul-1995.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 = 𝐷) → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq1i 7413 | Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | oveq2i 7414 | Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐶𝐹𝐴) = (𝐶𝐹𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | oveq12i 7415 | Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 28-Feb-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 & ⊢ 𝐶 = 𝐷 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | oveqi 7416 | Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-2007.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐶𝐴𝐷) = (𝐶𝐵𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | oveq123i 7417 | Equality inference for operation value. (Contributed by FL, 11-Jul-2010.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐶 & ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐷 & ⊢ 𝐹 = 𝐺 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = (𝐶𝐺𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | oveq1d 7418 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq2d 7419 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶𝐹𝐴) = (𝐶𝐹𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | oveqd 7420 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 9-Sep-2006.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶𝐴𝐷) = (𝐶𝐵𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq12d 7421 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | oveqan12d 7422 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | oveqan12rd 7423 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 10-Aug-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | oveq123d 7424 | Equality deduction for operation value. (Contributed by FL, 22-Dec-2008.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = 𝐺) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐺𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | fvoveq1d 7425 | Equality deduction for nested function and operation value. (Contributed by AV, 23-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹‘(𝐴𝑂𝐶)) = (𝐹‘(𝐵𝑂𝐶))) | ||
| Theorem | fvoveq1 7426 | Equality theorem for nested function and operation value. Closed form of fvoveq1d 7425. (Contributed by AV, 23-Jul-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝐹‘(𝐴𝑂𝐶)) = (𝐹‘(𝐵𝑂𝐶))) | ||
| Theorem | ovanraleqv 7427* | Equality theorem for a conjunction with an operation values within a restricted universal quantification. Technical theorem to be used to reduce the size of a significant number of proofs. (Contributed by AV, 13-Aug-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐵 = 𝑋 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐵 = 𝑋 → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑉 (𝜑 ∧ (𝐴 · 𝐵) = 𝐶) ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑉 (𝜓 ∧ (𝐴 · 𝑋) = 𝐶))) | ||
| Theorem | imbrov2fvoveq 7428 | Equality theorem for nested function and operation value in an implication for a binary relation. Technical theorem to be used to reduce the size of a significant number of proofs. (Contributed by AV, 17-Aug-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 = 𝑌 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑋 = 𝑌 → ((𝜑 → (𝐹‘((𝐺‘𝑋) · 𝑂))𝑅𝐴) ↔ (𝜓 → (𝐹‘((𝐺‘𝑌) · 𝑂))𝑅𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | ovrspc2v 7429* | If an operation value is element of a class for all operands of two classes, then the operation value is an element of the class for specific operands of the two classes. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2014.) |
| ⊢ (((𝑋 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐵) ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 (𝑥𝐹𝑦) ∈ 𝐶) → (𝑋𝐹𝑌) ∈ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | oveqrspc2v 7430* | Restricted specialization of operands, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 6-Dec-2014.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵)) → (𝑥𝐹𝑦) = (𝑥𝐺𝑦)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑋 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐵)) → (𝑋𝐹𝑌) = (𝑋𝐺𝑌)) | ||
| Theorem | oveqdr 7431 | Equality of two operations for any two operands. Useful in proofs using *propd theorems. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 29-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = 𝐺) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝑥𝐹𝑦) = (𝑥𝐺𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | nfovd 7432 | Deduction version of bound-variable hypothesis builder nfov 7433. (Contributed by NM, 13-Dec-2005.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐹) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥𝐵) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → Ⅎ𝑥(𝐴𝐹𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | nfov 7433 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for operation value. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-2004.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐹 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐵 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝐴𝐹𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | oprabidw 7434* | The law of concretion. Special case of Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. Version of oprabid 7435 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2376. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 20-Mar-2013.) Avoid ax-13 2376. (Revised by GG, 26-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ (〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∈ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | oprabid 7435 | 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 2376. Use the weaker oprabidw 7434 when possible. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 20-Mar-2013.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∈ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜑) | ||
| Theorem | ovex 7436 | The result of an operation is a set. (Contributed by NM, 13-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴𝐹𝐵) ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | ovexi 7437 | The result of an operation is a set. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 26-Jun-2021.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = (𝐵𝐹𝐶) ⇒ ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | ovexd 7438 | The result of an operation is a set. (Contributed by Glauco Siliprandi, 23-Oct-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | ovssunirn 7439 | The result of an operation value is always a subset of the union of the range. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 12-Jan-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋𝐹𝑌) ⊆ ∪ ran 𝐹 | ||
| Theorem | 0ov 7440 | Operation value of the empty set. (Contributed by AV, 15-May-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴∅𝐵) = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | ovprc 7441 | The value of an operation when the one of the arguments is a proper class. Note: this theorem is dependent on our particular definitions of operation value, function value, and ordered pair. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ Rel dom 𝐹 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ (𝐴 ∈ V ∧ 𝐵 ∈ V) → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = ∅) | ||
| Theorem | ovprc1 7442 | The value of an operation when the first argument is a proper class. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2004.) |
| ⊢ Rel dom 𝐹 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝐴 ∈ V → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = ∅) | ||
| Theorem | ovprc2 7443 | The value of an operation when the second argument is a proper class. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ Rel dom 𝐹 ⇒ ⊢ (¬ 𝐵 ∈ V → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) = ∅) | ||
| Theorem | ovrcl 7444 | Reverse closure for an operation value. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 5-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ Rel dom 𝐹 ⇒ ⊢ (𝐶 ∈ (𝐴𝐹𝐵) → (𝐴 ∈ V ∧ 𝐵 ∈ V)) | ||
| Theorem | elfvov1 7445 | Utility theorem: reverse closure for any operation that results in a function. (Contributed by SN, 18-May-2025.) |
| ⊢ Rel dom 𝑂 & ⊢ 𝑆 = (𝐼𝑂𝑅) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑌)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐼 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | elfvov2 7446 | Utility theorem: reverse closure for any operation that results in a function. (Contributed by SN, 4-Aug-2025.) |
| ⊢ Rel dom 𝑂 & ⊢ 𝑆 = (𝐼𝑂𝑅) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ (𝑆‘𝑌)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | csbov123 7447 | Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.) (Revised by NM, 23-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝐵𝐹𝐶) = (⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐹⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | csbov 7448* | Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 23-Aug-2018.) |
| ⊢ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝐵𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐹𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | csbov12g 7449* | Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝐵𝐹𝐶) = (⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵𝐹⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | csbov1g 7450* | Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝐵𝐹𝐶) = (⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐵𝐹𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | csbov2g 7451* | Move class substitution in and out of an operation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Nov-2005.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝐵𝐹𝐶) = (𝐵𝐹⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | rspceov 7452* | A frequently used special case of rspc2ev 3614 for operation values. (Contributed by NM, 21-Mar-2007.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝑆 = (𝐶𝐹𝐷)) → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑆 = (𝑥𝐹𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | elovimad 7453 | Elementhood of the image set of an operation value. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 13-Mar-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝐶) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) & ⊢ (𝜑 → Fun 𝐹) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐶 × 𝐷) ⊆ dom 𝐹) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐴𝐹𝐵) ∈ (𝐹 “ (𝐶 × 𝐷))) | ||
| Theorem | fnbrovb 7454 | Value of a binary operation expressed as a binary relation. See also fnbrfvb 6928 for functions on Cartesian products. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Feb-2022.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐹 Fn (𝑉 × 𝑊) ∧ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊)) → ((𝐴𝐹𝐵) = 𝐶 ↔ 〈𝐴, 𝐵〉𝐹𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | fnotovb 7455 | Equivalence of operation value and ordered triple membership, analogous to fnopfvb 6929. (Contributed by NM, 17-Dec-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 15-Feb-2022.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐹 Fn (𝐴 × 𝐵) ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐵) → ((𝐶𝐹𝐷) = 𝑅 ↔ 〈𝐶, 𝐷, 𝑅〉 ∈ 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | opabbrex 7456 | A collection of ordered pairs with an extension of a binary relation is a set. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 1-Nov-2017.) (Revised by BJ/AV, 20-Jun-2019.) (Proof shortened by OpenAI, 25-Mar-2020.) |
| ⊢ ((∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥𝑅𝑦 → 𝜑) ∧ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ 𝑉) → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝜓)} ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | opabresex2 7457* | Restrictions of a collection of ordered pairs of related elements are sets. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 1-Nov-2017.) (Revised by AV, 15-Jan-2021.) Add disjoint variable conditions betweem 𝑊, 𝐺 and 𝑥, 𝑦 to remove hypotheses. (Revised by SN, 13-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥(𝑊‘𝐺)𝑦 ∧ 𝜃)} ∈ V | ||
| Theorem | opabresex2d 7458* | Obsolete version of opabresex2 7457 as of 13-Dec-2024. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 1-Nov-2017.) (Revised by AV, 15-Jan-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥(𝑊‘𝐺)𝑦) → 𝜓) & ⊢ (𝜑 → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} ∈ 𝑉) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥(𝑊‘𝐺)𝑦 ∧ 𝜃)} ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | fvmptopab 7459* | The function value of a mapping 𝑀 to a restricted binary relation expressed as an ordered-pair class abstraction: The restricted binary relation is a binary relation given as value of a function 𝐹 restricted by the condition 𝜓. (Contributed by AV, 31-Jan-2021.) (Revised by AV, 29-Oct-2021.) Add disjoint variable condition on 𝐹, 𝑥, 𝑦 to remove a sethood hypothesis. (Revised by SN, 13-Dec-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑍 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ 𝑀 = (𝑧 ∈ V ↦ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥(𝐹‘𝑧)𝑦 ∧ 𝜑)}) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑀‘𝑍) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥(𝐹‘𝑍)𝑦 ∧ 𝜓)} | ||
| Theorem | fvmptopabOLD 7460* | Obsolete version of fvmptopab 7459 as of 13-Dec-2024. (Contributed by AV, 31-Jan-2021.) (Revised by AV, 29-Oct-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑧 = 𝑍) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑥(𝐹‘𝑍)𝑦} ∈ V) & ⊢ 𝑀 = (𝑧 ∈ V ↦ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥(𝐹‘𝑧)𝑦 ∧ 𝜒)}) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑀‘𝑍) = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥(𝐹‘𝑍)𝑦 ∧ 𝜓)}) | ||
| Theorem | f1opr 7461* | Condition for an operation to be one-to-one. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 17-Jun-2010.) |
| ⊢ (𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)–1-1→𝐶 ↔ (𝐹:(𝐴 × 𝐵)⟶𝐶 ∧ ∀𝑟 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝐵 ∀𝑡 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝐵 ((𝑟𝐹𝑠) = (𝑡𝐹𝑢) → (𝑟 = 𝑡 ∧ 𝑠 = 𝑢)))) | ||
| Theorem | brfvopab 7462 | The classes involved in a binary relation of a function value which is an ordered-pair class abstraction are sets. (Contributed by AV, 7-Jan-2021.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ V → (𝐹‘𝑋) = {〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑}) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴(𝐹‘𝑋)𝐵 → (𝑋 ∈ V ∧ 𝐴 ∈ V ∧ 𝐵 ∈ V)) | ||
| Theorem | dfoprab2 7463* | Class abstraction for operations in terms of class abstraction of ordered pairs. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-1995.) |
| ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑤, 𝑧〉 ∣ ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝑤 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∧ 𝜑)} | ||
| Theorem | reloprab 7464* | An operation class abstraction is a relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Jun-2004.) |
| ⊢ Rel {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | oprabv 7465* | If a pair and a class are in a relationship given by a class abstraction of a collection of nested ordered pairs, the involved classes are sets. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 8-Jul-2018.) |
| ⊢ (〈𝑋, 𝑌〉{〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑}𝑍 → (𝑋 ∈ V ∧ 𝑌 ∈ V ∧ 𝑍 ∈ V)) | ||
| Theorem | nfoprab1 7466 | The abstraction variables in an operation class abstraction are not free. (Contributed by NM, 25-Apr-1995.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 19-Jun-2012.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥{〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | nfoprab2 7467 | The abstraction variables in an operation class abstraction are not free. (Contributed by NM, 25-Apr-1995.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 30-Jul-2012.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦{〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | nfoprab3 7468 | The abstraction variables in an operation class abstraction are not free. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧{〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | nfoprab 7469* | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for an operation class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤{〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} | ||
| Theorem | oprabbid 7470* | Equivalent wff's yield equal operation class abstractions (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜑 & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜒}) | ||
| Theorem | oprabbidv 7471* | Equivalent wff's yield equal operation class abstractions (deduction form). (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜒}) | ||
| Theorem | oprabbii 7472* | Equivalent wff's yield equal operation class abstractions. (Contributed by NM, 28-May-1995.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 19-Jun-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | ssoprab2 7473 | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. Compare ssopab2 5521. (Contributed by FL, 6-Nov-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.) |
| ⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝜓) → {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓}) | ||
| Theorem | ssoprab2b 7474 | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. Compare ssopab2b 5524. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. (Contributed by FL, 6-Nov-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ({〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | eqoprab2bw 7475* | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and biconditional. Version of eqoprab2b 7476 with a disjoint variable condition, which does not require ax-13 2376. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Jan-2017.) Avoid ax-13 2376. (Revised by GG, 26-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ ({〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | eqoprab2b 7476 | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and biconditional. Compare eqopab2b 5527. Usage of this theorem is discouraged because it depends on ax-13 2376. Use the weaker eqoprab2bw 7475 when possible. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Jan-2017.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ({〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦∀𝑧(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
| Theorem | mpoeq123 7477* | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Mar-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐷 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝐵 = 𝐸 ∧ ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝐶 = 𝐹)) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐷, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐸 ↦ 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | mpoeq12 7478* | An equality theorem for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐸) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐶, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷 ↦ 𝐸)) | ||
| Theorem | mpoeq123dva 7479* | An equality deduction for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jan-2017.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐷) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 = 𝐸) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵)) → 𝐶 = 𝐹) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐷, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐸 ↦ 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | mpoeq123dv 7480* | An equality deduction for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 12-Sep-2011.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 = 𝐷) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 = 𝐸) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐹) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐷, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐸 ↦ 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | mpoeq123i 7481 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 15-Jul-2013.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐷 & ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐸 & ⊢ 𝐶 = 𝐹 ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐷, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐸 ↦ 𝐹) | ||
| Theorem | mpoeq3dva 7482* | Slightly more general equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 17-Oct-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | mpoeq3ia 7483 | An equality inference for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 16-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | mpoeq3dv 7484* | An equality deduction for the maps-to notation restricted to the value of the operation. (Contributed by SO, 16-Jul-2018.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | nfmpo1 7485 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for an operation in maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Aug-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | nfmpo2 7486 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for an operation in maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Aug-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | nfmpo 7487* | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for the maps-to notation. (Contributed by NM, 20-Feb-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝐴 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝐶 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) | ||
| Theorem | 0mpo0 7488* | A mapping operation with empty domain is empty. Generalization of mpo0 7490. (Contributed by AV, 27-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 = ∅ ∨ 𝐵 = ∅) → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = ∅) | ||
| Theorem | mpo0v 7489* | A mapping operation with empty domain. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 29-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) (Proof shortened by AV, 27-Jan-2024.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ ∅, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | mpo0 7490 | A mapping operation with empty domain. In this version of mpo0v 7489, the class of the second operator may depend on the first operator. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 29-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ ∅, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | oprab4 7491* | Two ways to state the domain of an operation. (Contributed by FL, 24-Jan-2010.) |
| ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ (〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∈ (𝐴 × 𝐵) ∧ 𝜑)} = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵) ∧ 𝜑)} | ||
| Theorem | cbvoprab1 7492* | Rule used to change first bound variable in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 20-Dec-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 5-Dec-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑤 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈〈𝑤, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | cbvoprab2 7493* | Change the second bound variable in an operation abstraction. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 11-Jun-2010.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 11-Dec-2016.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑤 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑤〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | cbvoprab12 7494* | Rule used to change first two bound variables in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 21-Feb-2004.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 22-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑣𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓 & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑤 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑣) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈〈𝑤, 𝑣〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | cbvoprab12v 7495* | Rule used to change first two bound variables in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 8-Oct-2004.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑤 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑣) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈〈𝑤, 𝑣〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | cbvoprab3 7496* | Rule used to change the third bound variable in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 22-Aug-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝜑 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝜓 & ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑤 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑤〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | cbvoprab3v 7497* | Rule used to change the third bound variable in an operation abstraction, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 8-Oct-2004.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 19-Jun-2012.) |
| ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑤 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈〈𝑥, 𝑦〉, 𝑤〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
| Theorem | cbvmpox 7498* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. This version of cbvmpo 7499 allows 𝐵 to be a function of 𝑥. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-2014.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝐵 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐷 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝐶 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝐶 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐸 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐸 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → 𝐵 = 𝐷) & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → 𝐶 = 𝐸) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑧 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑤 ∈ 𝐷 ↦ 𝐸) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmpo 7499* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. (Contributed by NM, 17-Dec-2013.) |
| ⊢ Ⅎ𝑧𝐶 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑤𝐶 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐷 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝐷 & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝑧 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝑤) → 𝐶 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑧 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑤 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐷) | ||
| Theorem | cbvmpov 7500* | Rule to change the bound variable in a maps-to function, using implicit substitution. With a longer proof analogous to cbvmpt 5223, some distinct variable requirements could be eliminated. (Contributed by NM, 11-Jun-2013.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → 𝐶 = 𝐸) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝑤 → 𝐸 = 𝐷) ⇒ ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐶) = (𝑧 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑤 ∈ 𝐵 ↦ 𝐷) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |