P. 9 of Theorem List - Metamath Proof Explorer

Theorem List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 801-900   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	impbida 801	Deduce an equivalence from two implications. Variant of impbid 212. (Contributed by NM, 17-Feb-2007.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	pm5.21nd 802	Eliminate an antecedent implied by each side of a biconditional. Variant of pm5.21ndd 379. (Contributed by NM, 20-Nov-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 4-Nov-2013.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ (𝜃 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	pm3.35 803	Conjunctive detachment. Theorem *3.35 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 112. Variant of pm2.27 42. (Contributed by NM, 14-Dec-2002.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → 𝜓)
Theorem	pm5.74da 804	Distribution of implication over biconditional (deduction form). Variant of pm5.74d 273. (Contributed by NM, 4-May-2007.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜃)))
Theorem	bitr 805	Theorem *4.22 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. bitri 275 in closed form. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	biantr 806	A transitive law of equivalence. Compare Theorem *4.22 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ↔ 𝜓)) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	pm4.14 807	Theorem *4.14 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. Related to con34b 316. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Oct-2012.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) → ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	pm3.37 808	Theorem *3.37 (Transp) of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 112. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Oct-2012.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) → ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) → ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	anim12 809	Conjoin antecedents and consequents of two premises. This is the closed theorem form of anim12d 609. Theorem *3.47 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 113. It was proved by Leibniz, and it evidently pleased him enough to call it praeclarum theorema (splendid theorem). (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 7-Apr-2013.)
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 → 𝜃)) → ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → (𝜓 ∧ 𝜃)))
Theorem	pm3.4 810	Conjunction implies implication. Theorem *3.4 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 113. (Contributed by NM, 31-Jul-1995.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	exbiri 811	Inference form of exbir 44499. This proof is exbiriVD 44874 automatically translated and minimized. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 31-Dec-2011.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 27-Jan-2013.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜒)))
Theorem	pm2.61ian 812	Elimination of an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 1-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒)
Theorem	pm2.61dan 813	Elimination of an antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 1-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)
Theorem	pm2.61ddan 814	Elimination of two antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2013.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)) → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃)
Theorem	pm2.61dda 815	Elimination of two antecedents. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2013.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜒) → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) → 𝜃)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃)
Theorem	mtand 816	A modus tollens deduction. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 19-Aug-2009.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	pm2.65da 817	Deduction for proof by contradiction. (Contributed by NM, 12-Jun-2014.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	condan 818	Proof by contradiction. (Contributed by NM, 9-Feb-2006.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Jun-2014.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	biadan 819	An implication is equivalent to the equivalence of some implied equivalence and some other equivalence involving a conjunction. A utility lemma as illustrated in biadanii 822 and elelb 36898. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Mar-2023.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 8-Mar-2023.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))))
Theorem	biadani 820	Inference associated with biadan 819. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)))
Theorem	biadaniALT 821	Alternate proof of biadani 820 not using biadan 819. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Mar-2023.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)))
Theorem	biadanii 822	Inference associated with biadani 820. Add a conjunction to an equivalence. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 20-Jun-2011.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 4-Mar-2023.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒))
Theorem	biadanid 823	Deduction associated with biadani 820. Add a conjunction to an equivalence. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 16-Jun-2024.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)))
Theorem	pm5.1 824	Two propositions are equivalent if they are both true. Theorem *5.1 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 123. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1994.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	pm5.21 825	Two propositions are equivalent if they are both false. Theorem *5.21 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 124. (Contributed by NM, 21-May-1994.)
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	pm5.35 826	Theorem *5.35 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. Closed form of 2thd 265. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜑 → 𝜒)) → (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)))
Theorem	abai 827	Introduce one conjunct as an antecedent to the other. "abai" stands for "and, biconditional, and, implication". (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 7-Dec-2012.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ (𝜑 → 𝜓)))
Theorem	pm4.45im 828	Conjunction with implication. Compare Theorem *4.45 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 119. (Contributed by NM, 17-May-1998.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ (𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 → 𝜑)))
Theorem	impimprbi 829	An implication and its reverse are equivalent exactly when both operands are equivalent. The right hand side resembles that of dfbi2 474, but ↔ is a weaker operator than ∧. Note that an implication and its reverse can never be simultaneously false, because of pm2.521 176. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 18-Dec-2023.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) ↔ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 → 𝜑)))
Theorem	nan 830	Theorem to move a conjunct in and out of a negation. (Contributed by NM, 9-Nov-2003.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → ¬ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜒))
Theorem	pm5.31 831	Theorem *5.31 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)))
Theorem	pm5.31r 832	Variant of pm5.31 831. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 15-Oct-2010.)
⊢ ((𝜒 ∧ (𝜑 → 𝜓)) → (𝜑 → (𝜒 ∧ 𝜓)))
Theorem	pm4.15 833	Theorem *4.15 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 117. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 18-Nov-2012.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜒) ↔ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → ¬ 𝜑))
Theorem	pm5.36 834	Theorem *5.36 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ↔ (𝜓 ∧ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)))
Theorem	annotanannot 835	A conjunction with a negated conjunction. (Contributed by AV, 8-Mar-2022.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 1-Apr-2022.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ¬ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	pm5.33 836	Theorem *5.33 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 125. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜑 ∧ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒)))
Theorem	syl12anc 837	Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 1-Aug-2009.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ (𝜒 ∧ 𝜃)) → 𝜏)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏)
Theorem	syl21anc 838	Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 1-Aug-2009.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) → 𝜏)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏)
Theorem	syl22anc 839	Syllogism combined with contraction. (Contributed by NM, 11-Mar-2012.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏)    &   ⊢ (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ (𝜃 ∧ 𝜏)) → 𝜂)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜂)
Theorem	bibiad 840	Eliminate an hypothesis 𝜃 in a biconditional. (Contributed by Thierry Arnoux, 4-May-2025.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜃) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒))
Theorem	syl1111anc 841	Four-hypothesis elimination deduction for an assertion with a singleton virtual hypothesis collection. Similar to syl112anc 1376 except the unification theorem uses left-nested conjunction. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 17-Oct-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜏)    &   ⊢ ((((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜃) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜂)
Theorem	syldbl2 842	Stacked hypotheseis implies goal. (Contributed by Stanislas Polu, 9-Mar-2020.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → (𝜓 → 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜃)
Theorem	mpsyl4anc 843	An elimination deduction. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 17-Oct-2017.)
⊢ 𝜑    &   ⊢ 𝜓    &   ⊢ 𝜒    &   ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜏)    &   ⊢ ((((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) ∧ 𝜒) ∧ 𝜏) → 𝜂)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜃 → 𝜂)
Theorem	pm4.87 844	Theorem *4.87 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 122. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Eric Schmidt, 26-Oct-2006.)
⊢ (((((𝜑 ∧ 𝜓) → 𝜒) ↔ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))) ∧ ((𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ↔ (𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)))) ∧ ((𝜓 → (𝜑 → 𝜒)) ↔ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) → 𝜒)))
Theorem	bimsc1 845	Removal of conjunct from one side of an equivalence. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1993.)
⊢ (((𝜑 → 𝜓) ∧ (𝜒 ↔ (𝜓 ∧ 𝜑))) → (𝜒 ↔ 𝜑))
Theorem	a2and 846	Deduction distributing a conjunction as embedded antecedent. (Contributed by AV, 25-Oct-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Jan-2020.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜌) → (𝜏 → 𝜃)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜌) → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) → 𝜏) → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜌) → 𝜃)))
Theorem	animpimp2impd 847	Deduction deriving nested implications from conjunctions. (Contributed by AV, 21-Aug-2022.)
⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜑) → (𝜒 → (𝜃 → 𝜂)))    &   ⊢ ((𝜓 ∧ (𝜑 ∧ 𝜃)) → (𝜂 → 𝜏))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 → 𝜒) → (𝜓 → (𝜃 → 𝜏))))
1.2.7  Logical disjunction This section defines disjunction of two formulas, denoted by infix "∨ " and read "or". It is defined in terms of implication and negation, which is possible in classical logic (but not in intuitionistic logic: see iset.mm). This section contains only theorems proved without df-an 396 (theorems that are proved using df-an 396 are deferred to the next section). Basic theorems that help simplifying and applying disjunction are olc 869, orc 868, and orcom 871. As mentioned in the "note on definitions" in the section comment for logical equivalence, all theorems in this and the previous section can be stated in terms of implication and negation only. Additionally, in classical logic (but not in intuitionistic logic: see iset.mm), it is also possible to translate conjunction into disjunction and conversely via the De Morgan law anor 985: conjunction and disjunction are dual connectives. Either is sufficient to develop all propositional calculus of the logic (together with implication and negation). In practice, conjunction is more efficient, its big advantage being the possibility to use it to group antecedents in a convenient way, using imp 406 and ex 412 as noted in the previous section. An illustration of the conservativity of df-an 396 is given by orim12dALT 912, which is an alternate proof of orim12d 967 not using df-an 396.
Syntax	wo 848	Extend wff definition to include disjunction ("or").
wff (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)
Definition	df-or 849	Define disjunction (logical "or"). Definition of [Margaris] p. 49. When the left operand, right operand, or both are true, the result is true; when both sides are false, the result is false. For example, it is true that (2 = 3 ∨ 4 = 4) (ex-or 30440). After we define the constant true ⊤ (df-tru 1543) and the constant false ⊥ (df-fal 1553), we will be able to prove these truth table values: ((⊤ ∨ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) (truortru 1577), ((⊤ ∨ ⊥) ↔ ⊤) (truorfal 1578), ((⊥ ∨ ⊤) ↔ ⊤) (falortru 1579), and ((⊥ ∨ ⊥) ↔ ⊥) (falorfal 1580). Contrast with ∧ (df-an 396), → (wi 4), ⊼ (df-nan 1492), and ⊻ (df-xor 1512). (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1992.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	pm4.64 850	Theorem *4.64 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	pm4.66 851	Theorem *4.66 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	pm2.53 852	Theorem *2.53 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	pm2.54 853	Theorem *2.54 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	imor 854	Implication in terms of disjunction. Theorem *4.6 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	imori 855	Infer disjunction from implication. (Contributed by NM, 12-Mar-2012.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)
Theorem	imorri 856	Infer implication from disjunction. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.)
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	pm4.62 857	Theorem *4.62 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 120. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	jaoi 858	Inference disjoining the antecedents of two implications. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1994.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    &   ⊢ (𝜒 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓)
Theorem	jao1i 859	Add a disjunct in the antecedent of an implication. (Contributed by Rodolfo Medina, 24-Sep-2010.)
⊢ (𝜓 → (𝜒 → 𝜑))    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜒 → 𝜑))
Theorem	jaod 860	Deduction disjoining the antecedents of two implications. (Contributed by NM, 18-Aug-1994.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜃) → 𝜒))
Theorem	mpjaod 861	Eliminate a disjunction in a deduction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 29-May-2016.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜃 → 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜃))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)
Theorem	ori 862	Infer implication from disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 11-Jun-1994.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	orri 863	Infer disjunction from implication. (Contributed by NM, 11-Jun-1994.)
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)
Theorem	orrd 864	Deduce disjunction from implication. (Contributed by NM, 27-Nov-1995.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))
Theorem	ord 865	Deduce implication from disjunction. (Contributed by NM, 18-May-1994.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (¬ 𝜓 → 𝜒))
Theorem	orci 866	Deduction introducing a disjunct. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jan-2008.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Nov-2012.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)
Theorem	olci 867	Deduction introducing a disjunct. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jan-2008.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 14-Nov-2012.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑)
Theorem	orc 868	Introduction of a disjunct. Theorem *2.2 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 104. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	olc 869	Introduction of a disjunct. Axiom *1.3 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 96. (Contributed by NM, 30-Aug-1993.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑))
Theorem	pm1.4 870	Axiom *1.4 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 96. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑))
Theorem	orcom 871	Commutative law for disjunction. Theorem *4.31 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 118. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-1993.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 15-Nov-2012.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) ↔ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜑))
Theorem	orcomd 872	Commutation of disjuncts in consequent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Dec-2010.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	orcoms 873	Commutation of disjuncts in antecedent. (Contributed by NM, 2-Dec-2012.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜑) → 𝜒)
Theorem	orcd 874	Deduction introducing a disjunct. A translation of natural deduction rule ∨ IR (∨ insertion right), see natded 30422. (Contributed by NM, 20-Sep-2007.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))
Theorem	olcd 875	Deduction introducing a disjunct. A translation of natural deduction rule ∨ IL (∨ insertion left), see natded 30422. (Contributed by NM, 11-Apr-2008.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2013.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	orcs 876	Deduction eliminating disjunct. Notational convention: We sometimes suffix with "s" the label of an inference that manipulates an antecedent, leaving the consequent unchanged. The "s" means that the inference eliminates the need for a syllogism (syl 17) -type inference in a proof. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1994.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)
Theorem	olcs 877	Deduction eliminating disjunct. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jun-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 3-Oct-2013.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜓 → 𝜒)
Theorem	olcnd 878	A lemma for Conjunctive Normal Form unit propagation, in deduction form. (Contributed by Giovanni Mascellani, 15-Sep-2017.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Apr-2024.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓)
Theorem	orcnd 879	A lemma for Conjunctive Normal Form unit propagation, in deduction form. (Contributed by Giovanni Mascellani, 15-Sep-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜒)
Theorem	mtord 880	A modus tollens deduction involving disjunction. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 15-Jul-2009.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜒)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜃)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → (𝜒 ∨ 𝜃)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	pm3.2ni 881	Infer negated disjunction of negated premises. (Contributed by NM, 4-Apr-1995.)
⊢ ¬ 𝜑    &   ⊢ ¬ 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ ¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)
Theorem	pm2.45 882	Theorem *2.45 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 106. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜑)
Theorem	pm2.46 883	Theorem *2.46 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 106. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ¬ 𝜓)
Theorem	pm2.47 884	Theorem *2.47 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	pm2.48 885	Theorem *2.48 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	pm2.49 886	Theorem *2.49 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (¬ 𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	norbi 887	If neither of two propositions is true, then these propositions are equivalent. (Contributed by BJ, 26-Apr-2019.)
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))
Theorem	nbior 888	If two propositions are not equivalent, then at least one is true. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Apr-2019.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 19-Jan-2020.)
⊢ (¬ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓) → (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
Theorem	orel1 889	Elimination of disjunction by denial of a disjunct. Theorem *2.55 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 21-Jul-2012.)
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓))
Theorem	pm2.25 890	Theorem *2.25 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 104. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓))
Theorem	orel2 891	Elimination of disjunction by denial of a disjunct. Theorem *2.56 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 12-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 5-Apr-2013.)
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∨ 𝜑) → 𝜓))
Theorem	pm2.67-2 892	Slight generalization of Theorem *2.67 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜒) → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	pm2.67 893	Theorem *2.67 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓) → (𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	curryax 894	A non-intuitionistic positive statement, sometimes called a paradox of material implication. Sometimes called Curry's axiom. Similar to exmid 895 (obtained by substituting ⊥ for 𝜓) but positive. For another non-intuitionistic positive statement, see peirce 202. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Apr-2021.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ (𝜑 → 𝜓))
Theorem	exmid 895	Law of excluded middle, also called the principle of tertium non datur. Theorem *2.11 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. It says that something is either true or not true; there are no in-between values of truth. This is an essential distinction of our classical logic and is not a theorem of intuitionistic logic. In intuitionistic logic, if this statement is true for some 𝜑, then 𝜑 is decidable. (Contributed by NM, 29-Dec-1992.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ 𝜑)
Theorem	exmidd 896	Law of excluded middle in a context. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Feb-2017.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜓))
Theorem	pm2.1 897	Theorem *2.1 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 23-Nov-2012.)
⊢ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜑)
Theorem	pm2.13 898	Theorem *2.13 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 101. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ (𝜑 ∨ ¬ ¬ ¬ 𝜑)
Theorem	pm2.621 899	Theorem *2.621 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.)
⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → 𝜓))
Theorem	pm2.62 900	Theorem *2.62 of [WhiteheadRussell] p. 107. (Contributed by NM, 3-Jan-2005.) (Proof shortened by Wolf Lammen, 13-Dec-2013.)
⊢ ((𝜑 ∨ 𝜓) → ((𝜑 → 𝜓) → 𝜓))