| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 96 of 505) | < 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: | (1-31211) |
(31212-32734) |
(32735-50479) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | oieu 9501 | Uniqueness of the unique ordinal isomorphism. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 23-May-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ 𝑅 Se 𝐴) → ((Ord 𝐵 ∧ 𝐺 Isom E , 𝑅 (𝐵, 𝐴)) ↔ (𝐵 = dom 𝐹 ∧ 𝐺 = 𝐹))) | ||
| Theorem | oismo 9502 | When 𝐴 is a subclass of On, 𝐹 is a strictly monotone ordinal functions, and it is also complete (it is an isomorphism onto all of 𝐴). The proof avoids ax-rep 5242 (the second statement is trivial under ax-rep 5242). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso( E , 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ On → (Smo 𝐹 ∧ ran 𝐹 = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | oiid 9503 | The order type of an ordinal under the ∈ order is itself, and the order isomorphism is the identity function. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 → OrdIso( E , 𝐴) = ( I ↾ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | hartogslem1 9504* | Lemma for hartogs 9506. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jan-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = {〈𝑟, 𝑦〉 ∣ (((dom 𝑟 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ ( I ↾ dom 𝑟) ⊆ 𝑟 ∧ 𝑟 ⊆ (dom 𝑟 × dom 𝑟)) ∧ (𝑟 ∖ I ) We dom 𝑟) ∧ 𝑦 = dom OrdIso((𝑟 ∖ I ), dom 𝑟))} & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑠, 𝑡〉 ∣ ∃𝑤 ∈ 𝑦 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 ((𝑠 = (𝑓‘𝑤) ∧ 𝑡 = (𝑓‘𝑧)) ∧ 𝑤 E 𝑧)} ⇒ ⊢ (dom 𝐹 ⊆ 𝒫 (𝐴 × 𝐴) ∧ Fun 𝐹 ∧ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ran 𝐹 = {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≼ 𝐴})) | ||
| Theorem | hartogslem2 9505* | Lemma for hartogs 9506. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = {〈𝑟, 𝑦〉 ∣ (((dom 𝑟 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ ( I ↾ dom 𝑟) ⊆ 𝑟 ∧ 𝑟 ⊆ (dom 𝑟 × dom 𝑟)) ∧ (𝑟 ∖ I ) We dom 𝑟) ∧ 𝑦 = dom OrdIso((𝑟 ∖ I ), dom 𝑟))} & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑠, 𝑡〉 ∣ ∃𝑤 ∈ 𝑦 ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 ((𝑠 = (𝑓‘𝑤) ∧ 𝑡 = (𝑓‘𝑧)) ∧ 𝑤 E 𝑧)} ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≼ 𝐴} ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | hartogs 9506* | The class of ordinals dominated by a given set is an ordinal. A shorter (when taking into account lemmas hartogslem1 9504 and hartogslem2 9505) proof can be given using the axiom of choice, see ondomon 10547. As its label indicates, this result is used to justify the definition of the Hartogs function df-har 9519. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 22-Oct-2009.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≼ 𝐴} ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | wofib 9507 | The only sets which are well-ordered forwards and backwards are finite sets. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 30-Jan-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 23-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ Fin) ↔ (𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ ◡𝑅 We 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | wemaplem1 9508* | Value of the lexicographic order on a sequence space. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 18-Jan-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑥‘𝑧)𝑆(𝑦‘𝑧) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑤𝑅𝑧 → (𝑥‘𝑤) = (𝑦‘𝑤)))} ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑃 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑄 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑃𝑇𝑄 ↔ ∃𝑎 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑃‘𝑎)𝑆(𝑄‘𝑎) ∧ ∀𝑏 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑏𝑅𝑎 → (𝑃‘𝑏) = (𝑄‘𝑏))))) | ||
| Theorem | wemaplem2 9509* | Lemma for wemapso 9513. Transitivity. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 17-Jan-2015.) (Revised by AV, 21-Jul-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑥‘𝑧)𝑆(𝑦‘𝑧) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑤𝑅𝑧 → (𝑥‘𝑤) = (𝑦‘𝑤)))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑃 ∈ (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑄 ∈ (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Or 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑆 Po 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑎 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑃‘𝑎)𝑆(𝑋‘𝑎)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑐 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑐𝑅𝑎 → (𝑃‘𝑐) = (𝑋‘𝑐))) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑏 ∈ 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑋‘𝑏)𝑆(𝑄‘𝑏)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑐 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑐𝑅𝑏 → (𝑋‘𝑐) = (𝑄‘𝑐))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑃𝑇𝑄) | ||
| Theorem | wemaplem3 9510* | Lemma for wemapso 9513. Transitivity. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 17-Jan-2015.) (Revised by AV, 21-Jul-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑥‘𝑧)𝑆(𝑦‘𝑧) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑤𝑅𝑧 → (𝑥‘𝑤) = (𝑦‘𝑤)))} & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑃 ∈ (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑄 ∈ (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴)) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Or 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑆 Po 𝐵) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑃𝑇𝑋) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋𝑇𝑄) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑃𝑇𝑄) | ||
| Theorem | wemappo 9511* |
Construct lexicographic order on a function space based on a
well-ordering of the indices and a total ordering of the values.
Without totality on the values or least differing indices, the best we can prove here is a partial order. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 18-Jan-2015.) (Revised by AV, 21-Jul-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑥‘𝑧)𝑆(𝑦‘𝑧) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑤𝑅𝑧 → (𝑥‘𝑤) = (𝑦‘𝑤)))} ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝑆 Po 𝐵) → 𝑇 Po (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | wemapsolem 9512* | Lemma for wemapso 9513. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 18-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 8-Feb-2015.) (Revised by AV, 21-Jul-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑥‘𝑧)𝑆(𝑦‘𝑧) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑤𝑅𝑧 → (𝑥‘𝑤) = (𝑦‘𝑤)))} & ⊢ 𝑈 ⊆ (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Or 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑆 Or 𝐵) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ ((𝑎 ∈ 𝑈 ∧ 𝑏 ∈ 𝑈) ∧ 𝑎 ≠ 𝑏)) → ∃𝑐 ∈ dom (𝑎 ∖ 𝑏)∀𝑑 ∈ dom (𝑎 ∖ 𝑏) ¬ 𝑑𝑅𝑐) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑇 Or 𝑈) | ||
| Theorem | wemapso 9513* | Construct lexicographic order on a function space based on a well-ordering of the indices and a total ordering of the values. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 18-Jan-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 8-Feb-2015.) (Revised by AV, 21-Jul-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑥‘𝑧)𝑆(𝑦‘𝑧) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑤𝑅𝑧 → (𝑥‘𝑤) = (𝑦‘𝑤)))} ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ 𝑆 Or 𝐵) → 𝑇 Or (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | wemapso2lem 9514* | Lemma for wemapso2 9515. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Feb-2015.) (Revised by AV, 1-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑥‘𝑧)𝑆(𝑦‘𝑧) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑤𝑅𝑧 → (𝑥‘𝑤) = (𝑦‘𝑤)))} & ⊢ 𝑈 = {𝑥 ∈ (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴) ∣ 𝑥 finSupp 𝑍} ⇒ ⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝑆 Or 𝐵) ∧ 𝑍 ∈ 𝑊) → 𝑇 Or 𝑈) | ||
| Theorem | wemapso2 9515* | An alternative to having a well-order on 𝑅 in wemapso 9513 is to restrict the function set to finitely-supported functions. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 8-Feb-2015.) (Revised by AV, 1-Jul-2019.) |
| ⊢ 𝑇 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 ((𝑥‘𝑧)𝑆(𝑦‘𝑧) ∧ ∀𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑤𝑅𝑧 → (𝑥‘𝑤) = (𝑦‘𝑤)))} & ⊢ 𝑈 = {𝑥 ∈ (𝐵 ↑m 𝐴) ∣ 𝑥 finSupp 𝑍} ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝑆 Or 𝐵) → 𝑇 Or 𝑈) | ||
| Theorem | card2on 9516* | The alternate definition of the cardinal of a set given in cardval2 9977 always gives a set, and indeed an ordinal. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≺ 𝐴} ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | card2inf 9517* | The alternate definition of the cardinal of a set given in cardval2 9977 has the curious property that for non-numerable sets (for which ndmfv 6914 yields ∅), it still evaluates to a nonempty set, and indeed it contains ω. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-Jan-2013.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 27-Apr-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (¬ ∃𝑦 ∈ On 𝑦 ≈ 𝐴 → ω ⊆ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≺ 𝐴}) | ||
| Syntax | char 9518 | Class symbol for the Hartogs function. |
| class har | ||
| Definition | df-har 9519* |
Define the Hartogs function as mapping a set to the class of ordinals it
dominates. That class is an ordinal by hartogs 9506, which is used in
harf 9520.
The Hartogs number of a set is the least ordinal not dominated by that set. Theorem harval2 9983 proves that the Hartogs function actually gives the Hartogs number for well-orderable sets. The Hartogs number of an ordinal is its cardinal successor. This is proved for finite ordinal in harsucnn 9984. Traditionally, the Hartogs number of a set 𝑋 is written ℵ(𝑋), and its cardinal successor, 𝑋 +; we use functional notation for this, and cannot use the aleph symbol because it is taken for the enumerating function of the infinite initial ordinals df-aleph 9926. Some authors define the Hartogs number of a set to be the least *infinite* ordinal which does not inject into it, thus causing the range to consist only of alephs. We use the simpler definition where the value can be any successor cardinal. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ har = (𝑥 ∈ V ↦ {𝑦 ∈ On ∣ 𝑦 ≼ 𝑥}) | ||
| Theorem | harf 9520 | Functionality of the Hartogs function. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ har:V⟶On | ||
| Theorem | harcl 9521 | Values of the Hartogs function are ordinals (closure of the Hartogs function in the ordinals). (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (har‘𝑋) ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | harval 9522* | Function value of the Hartogs function. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 → (har‘𝑋) = {𝑦 ∈ On ∣ 𝑦 ≼ 𝑋}) | ||
| Theorem | elharval 9523 | The Hartogs number of a set contains exactly the ordinals that set dominates. Combined with harcl 9521, this implies that the Hartogs number of a set is greater than all ordinals that set dominates. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑌 ∈ (har‘𝑋) ↔ (𝑌 ∈ On ∧ 𝑌 ≼ 𝑋)) | ||
| Theorem | harndom 9524 | The Hartogs number of a set does not inject into that set. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ¬ (har‘𝑋) ≼ 𝑋 | ||
| Theorem | harword 9525 | Weak ordering property of the Hartogs function. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 14-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≼ 𝑌 → (har‘𝑋) ⊆ (har‘𝑌)) | ||
| Syntax | cwdom 9526 | Class symbol for the weak dominance relation. |
| class ≼* | ||
| Definition | df-wdom 9527* | A set is weakly dominated by a "larger" set if the "larger" set can be mapped onto the "smaller" set or the smaller set is empty, or equivalently, if the smaller set can be placed into bijection with some partition of the larger set. Dominance (df-dom 8945) implies weak dominance (over ZF). The principle asserting the converse is known as the partition principle and is independent of ZF. Theorem fodom 10507 proves that the axiom of choice implies the partition principle (over ZF). It is not known whether the partition principle is equivalent to the axiom of choice (over ZF), although it is know to imply dependent choice. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ ≼* = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑧 𝑧:𝑦–onto→𝑥)} | ||
| Theorem | relwdom 9528 | Weak dominance is a relation. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ Rel ≼* | ||
| Theorem | brwdom 9529* | Property of weak dominance (definitional form). (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑌 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 ↔ (𝑋 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑧 𝑧:𝑌–onto→𝑋))) | ||
| Theorem | brwdomi 9530* | Property of weak dominance, forward direction only. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 5-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 → (𝑋 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑧 𝑧:𝑌–onto→𝑋)) | ||
| Theorem | brwdomn0 9531* | Weak dominance over nonempty sets. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 5-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≠ ∅ → (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 ↔ ∃𝑧 𝑧:𝑌–onto→𝑋)) | ||
| Theorem | 0wdom 9532 | Any set weakly dominates the empty set. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 → ∅ ≼* 𝑋) | ||
| Theorem | fowdom 9533 | An onto function implies weak dominance. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐹 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐹:𝑌–onto→𝑋) → 𝑋 ≼* 𝑌) | ||
| Theorem | wdomref 9534 | Reflexivity of weak dominance. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝑋 ≼* 𝑋) | ||
| Theorem | brwdom2 9535* | Alternate characterization of the weak dominance predicate which does not require special treatment of the empty set. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑌 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 ↔ ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝒫 𝑌∃𝑧 𝑧:𝑦–onto→𝑋)) | ||
| Theorem | domwdom 9536 | Weak dominance is implied by dominance in the usual sense. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≼ 𝑌 → 𝑋 ≼* 𝑌) | ||
| Theorem | wdomtr 9537 | Transitivity of weak dominance. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 5-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 ∧ 𝑌 ≼* 𝑍) → 𝑋 ≼* 𝑍) | ||
| Theorem | wdomen1 9538 | Equality-like theorem for equinumerosity and weak dominance. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 18-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ≈ 𝐵 → (𝐴 ≼* 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ≼* 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | wdomen2 9539 | Equality-like theorem for equinumerosity and weak dominance. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 18-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ≈ 𝐵 → (𝐶 ≼* 𝐴 ↔ 𝐶 ≼* 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | wdompwdom 9540 | Weak dominance strengthens to usual dominance on the power sets. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 5-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 → 𝒫 𝑋 ≼ 𝒫 𝑌) | ||
| Theorem | canthwdom 9541 | Cantor's Theorem, stated using weak dominance (this is actually a stronger statement than canth2 9118, equivalent to canth 7365). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝒫 𝐴 ≼* 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | wdom2d 9542* | Deduce weak dominance from an implicit onto function (stated in a way which avoids ax-rep 5242). (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 13-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑥 = 𝑋) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≼* 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | wdomd 9543* | Deduce weak dominance from an implicit onto function. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 13-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 𝑥 = 𝑋) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ≼* 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | brwdom3 9544* | Condition for weak dominance with a condition reminiscent of wdomd 9543. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 13-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 ↔ ∃𝑓∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑌 𝑥 = (𝑓‘𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | brwdom3i 9545* | Weak dominance implies existence of a covering function. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 13-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 → ∃𝑓∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑌 𝑥 = (𝑓‘𝑦)) | ||
| Theorem | unwdomg 9546 | Weak dominance of a (disjoint) union. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 13-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ≼* 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ≼* 𝐷 ∧ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐷) = ∅) → (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) ≼* (𝐵 ∪ 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | xpwdomg 9547 | Weak dominance of a Cartesian product. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 13-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ≼* 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ≼* 𝐷) → (𝐴 × 𝐶) ≼* (𝐵 × 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | wdomima2g 9548 | A set is weakly dominant over its image under any function. This version of wdomimag 9549 is stated so as to avoid ax-rep 5242. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((Fun 𝐹 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ≼* 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | wdomimag 9549 | A set is weakly dominant over its image under any function. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 14-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((Fun 𝐹 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉) → (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ≼* 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | unxpwdom2 9550 | Lemma for unxpwdom 9551. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 × 𝐴) ≈ (𝐵 ∪ 𝐶) → (𝐴 ≼* 𝐵 ∨ 𝐴 ≼ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | unxpwdom 9551 | If a Cartesian product is dominated by a union, then the base set is either weakly dominated by one factor of the union or dominated by the other. Extracted from Lemma 2.3 of [KanamoriPincus] p. 420. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 × 𝐴) ≼ (𝐵 ∪ 𝐶) → (𝐴 ≼* 𝐵 ∨ 𝐴 ≼ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | ixpiunwdom 9552* | Describe an onto function from the indexed cartesian product to the indexed union. Together with ixpssmapg 8926 this shows that ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴𝐵 and X𝑥 ∈ 𝐴𝐵 have closely linked cardinalities. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 27-Aug-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊 ∧ X𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ≠ ∅) → ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 ≼* (X𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝐵 × 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | harwdom 9553 | The value of the Hartogs function at a set 𝑋 is weakly dominated by 𝒫 (𝑋 × 𝑋). This follows from a more precise analysis of the bound used in hartogs 9506 to prove that (har‘𝑋) is an ordinal. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 → (har‘𝑋) ≼* 𝒫 (𝑋 × 𝑋)) | ||
| Axiom | ax-reg 9554* | Axiom of Regularity. An axiom of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. Also called the Axiom of Foundation. A rather non-intuitive axiom that denies more than it asserts, it states (in the form of zfreg 9558) that every nonempty set contains a set disjoint from itself. One consequence is that it denies the existence of a set containing itself (elirrv 9559). A stronger version that works for proper classes is proved as zfregs 9701. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → ∃𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥))) | ||
| Theorem | axreg2 9555* | Axiom of Regularity expressed more compactly. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | zfregcl 9556* | The Axiom of Regularity with class variables. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1994.) Replace sethood hypothesis with sethood antecedent. (Revised by BJ, 27-Apr-2021.) Avoid ax-10 2182 and ax-12 2219. (Revised by TM, 31-Dec-2025.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | zfregclOLD 9557* | Obsolete version of zfregcl 9556 as of 31-Dec-2025. (Contributed by NM, 5-Aug-1994.) Replace sethood hypothesis with sethood antecedent. (Revised by BJ, 27-Apr-2021.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | zfreg 9558* | The Axiom of Regularity using abbreviations. Axiom 6 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 21. This is called the "weak form". Axiom Reg of [BellMachover] p. 480. There is also a "strong form", not requiring that 𝐴 be a set, that can be proved with more difficulty (see zfregs 9701). (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.) Replace sethood hypothesis with sethood antecedent. (Revised by BJ, 27-Apr-2021.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐴 ≠ ∅) → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 ∩ 𝐴) = ∅) | ||
| Theorem | elirrv 9559 | The membership relation is irreflexive: no set is a member of itself. Theorem 105 of [Suppes] p. 54. This is trivial to prove from zfregfr 9573 and efrirr 5642 (see elirrvALT 9574), but this proof is direct from ax-reg 9554. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) Reduce axiom dependencies and make use of ax-reg 9554 directly. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 27-Dec-2025.) Avoid ax-pr 5405. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 21-May-2026.) (Proof shortened by Matthew House, 23-May-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | elirrvOLD 9560 | Obsolete version of elirrv 9559 as of 21-May-2026. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) Reduce axiom dependencies and make use of ax-reg 9554 directly. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 27-Dec-2025.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | elirrvOLDOLD 9561 | Obsolete version of elirrv 9559 as of 27-Dec-2025. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | elirr 9562 | No class is a member of itself. Exercise 6 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. Theorem 1.9(i) of [Schloeder] p. 1. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 9-Jul-2011.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | elneq 9563 | A class is not equal to any of its elements. (Contributed by AV, 14-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | nelaneq 9564 | A class is not an element of and equal to a class at the same time. Variant of elneq 9563 analogously to elnotel 9579 and en2lp 9575. (Proposed by BJ, 18-Jun-2022.) (Contributed by AV, 18-Jun-2022.) (Proof shortened by TM, 31-Dec-2025.) (Proof shortened by SN, 22-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐴 = 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | nelaneqOLD 9565 | Obsolete version of nelaneq 9564 as of 22-Apr-2026. (Proposed by BJ, 18-Jun-2022.) (Contributed by AV, 18-Jun-2022.) (Proof shortened by TM, 31-Dec-2025.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐴 = 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | nelaneqOLDOLD 9566 | Obsolete version of nelaneq 9564 as of 31-Dec-2025. (Proposed by BJ, 18-Jun-2022.) (Contributed by AV, 18-Jun-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐴 = 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | epinid0 9567 | The membership relation and the identity relation are disjoint. Variable-free version of nelaneq 9564. (Proposed by BJ, 18-Jun-2022.) (Contributed by AV, 18-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ ( E ∩ I ) = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | sucprcreg 9568 | A class is equal to its successor iff it is a proper class (assuming the Axiom of Regularity). (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2004.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 16-Apr-2019.) (Proof shortened by SN, 22-Apr-2026.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝐴 ∈ V ↔ suc 𝐴 = 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | sucprcregOLD 9569 | Obsolete version of sucprcreg 9568 as of 31-Dec-2025. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2004.) (Proof shortened by BJ, 16-Apr-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (¬ 𝐴 ∈ V ↔ suc 𝐴 = 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | ruv 9570 | The Russell class is equal to the universe V. Exercise 5 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 22. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 4-Oct-2008.) |
| ⊢ {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} = V | ||
| Theorem | ruALT 9571 | Alternate proof of ru 3752, simplified using (indirectly) the Axiom of Regularity ax-reg 9554. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 4-Oct-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} ∉ V | ||
| Theorem | disjcsn 9572 | A class is disjoint from its singleton. A consequence of regularity. (Contributed by Jonathan Ben-Naim, 3-Jun-2011.) (Revised by BJ, 4-Apr-2019.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∩ {𝐴}) = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | zfregfr 9573 | The membership relation is well-founded on any class. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.) |
| ⊢ E Fr 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | elirrvALT 9574 | Alternate proof of elirrv 9559, shorter but using more axioms. (Contributed by BTernaryTau, 28-Dec-2025.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | en2lp 9575 | No class has 2-cycle membership loops. Theorem 7X(b) of [Enderton] p. 206. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ ¬ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | elnanel 9576 | Two classes are not elements of each other simultaneously. This is just a rewriting of en2lp 9575 and serves as an example in the context of Godel codes, see elnanelprv 35820. (Contributed by AV, 5-Nov-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ⊼ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | cnvepnep 9577 | The membership (epsilon) relation and its converse are disjoint, i.e., E is an asymmetric relation. Variable-free version of en2lp 9575. (Proposed by BJ, 18-Jun-2022.) (Contributed by AV, 19-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (◡ E ∩ E ) = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | epnsym 9578 | The membership (epsilon) relation is not symmetric. (Contributed by AV, 18-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ ◡ E ≠ E | ||
| Theorem | elnotel 9579 | A class cannot be an element of one of its elements. (Contributed by AV, 14-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → ¬ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | elnel 9580 | A class cannot be an element of one of its elements. (Contributed by AV, 14-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝐵 ∉ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | en3lplem1 9581* | Lemma for en3lp 9583. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝑥 ∩ {𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶}) ≠ ∅)) | ||
| Theorem | en3lplem2 9582* | Lemma for en3lp 9583. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝑥 ∈ {𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶} → (𝑥 ∩ {𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶}) ≠ ∅)) | ||
| Theorem | en3lp 9583 | No class has 3-cycle membership loops. This proof was automatically generated from the virtual deduction proof en3lpVD 45445 using a translation program. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 24-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ ¬ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | preleqg 9584 | Equality of two unordered pairs when one member of each pair contains the other member. Closed form of preleq 9585. (Contributed by AV, 15-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ {𝐴, 𝐵} = {𝐶, 𝐷}) → (𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | preleq 9585 | Equality of two unordered pairs when one member of each pair contains the other member. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.) (Revised by AV, 15-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ {𝐴, 𝐵} = {𝐶, 𝐷}) → (𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | preleqALT 9586 | Alternate proof of preleq 9585, not based on preleqg 9584: Equality of two unordered pairs when one member of each pair contains the other member. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐷 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ {𝐴, 𝐵} = {𝐶, 𝐷}) → (𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | opthreg 9587 | Theorem for alternate representation of ordered pairs, requiring the Axiom of Regularity ax-reg 9554 (via the preleq 9585 step). See df-op 4601 for a description of other ordered pair representations. Exercise 34 of [Enderton] p. 207. (Contributed by NM, 16-Oct-1996.) (Proof shortened by AV, 15-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐶 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐷 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ({𝐴, {𝐴, 𝐵}} = {𝐶, {𝐶, 𝐷}} ↔ (𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷)) | ||
| Theorem | suc11reg 9588 | The successor operation behaves like a one-to-one function (assuming the Axiom of Regularity). Exercise 35 of [Enderton] p. 208 and its converse. (Contributed by NM, 25-Oct-2003.) |
| ⊢ (suc 𝐴 = suc 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | dford2 9589* | Assuming ax-reg 9554, an ordinal is a transitive class on which inclusion satisfies trichotomy. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 27-Oct-2010.) |
| ⊢ (Ord 𝐴 ↔ (Tr 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∨ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥))) | ||
| Theorem | inf0 9590* | Existence of ω implies our axiom of infinity ax-inf 9607. The proof shows that the especially contrived class "ran (rec((𝑣 ∈ V ↦ suc 𝑣), 𝑥) ↾ ω) " exists, is a subset of its union, and contains a given set 𝑥 (and thus is nonempty). Thus, it provides an example demonstrating that a set 𝑦 exists with the necessary properties demanded by ax-inf 9607. (Contributed by NM, 15-Oct-1996.) Revised to closed form. (Revised by BJ, 20-May-2024.) |
| ⊢ (ω ∈ 𝑉 → ∃𝑦(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 → ∃𝑤(𝑧 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ 𝑤 ∈ 𝑦)))) | ||
| Theorem | inf1 9591 | Variation of Axiom of Infinity (using zfinf 9608 as a hypothesis). Axiom of Infinity in [FreydScedrov] p. 283. (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-1996.) (Revised by David Abernethy, 1-Oct-2013.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → ∃𝑧(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥))) ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ≠ ∅ ∧ ∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → ∃𝑧(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥))) | ||
| Theorem | inf2 9592* | Variation of Axiom of Infinity. There exists a nonempty set that is a subset of its union (using zfinf 9608 as a hypothesis). Abbreviated version of the Axiom of Infinity in [FreydScedrov] p. 283. (Contributed by NM, 28-Oct-1996.) |
| ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → ∃𝑧(𝑦 ∈ 𝑧 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥))) ⇒ ⊢ ∃𝑥(𝑥 ≠ ∅ ∧ 𝑥 ⊆ ∪ 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | inf3lema 9593* | Lemma for our Axiom of Infinity => standard Axiom of Infinity. See inf3 9604 for detailed description. (Contributed by NM, 28-Oct-1996.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑦 ∈ V ↦ {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ (𝑤 ∩ 𝑥) ⊆ 𝑦}) & ⊢ 𝐹 = (rec(𝐺, ∅) ↾ ω) & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ (𝐺‘𝐵) ↔ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ (𝐴 ∩ 𝑥) ⊆ 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | inf3lemb 9594* | Lemma for our Axiom of Infinity => standard Axiom of Infinity. See inf3 9604 for detailed description. (Contributed by NM, 28-Oct-1996.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑦 ∈ V ↦ {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ (𝑤 ∩ 𝑥) ⊆ 𝑦}) & ⊢ 𝐹 = (rec(𝐺, ∅) ↾ ω) & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐹‘∅) = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | inf3lemc 9595* | Lemma for our Axiom of Infinity => standard Axiom of Infinity. See inf3 9604 for detailed description. (Contributed by NM, 28-Oct-1996.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑦 ∈ V ↦ {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ (𝑤 ∩ 𝑥) ⊆ 𝑦}) & ⊢ 𝐹 = (rec(𝐺, ∅) ↾ ω) & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐹‘suc 𝐴) = (𝐺‘(𝐹‘𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | inf3lemd 9596* | Lemma for our Axiom of Infinity => standard Axiom of Infinity. See inf3 9604 for detailed description. (Contributed by NM, 28-Oct-1996.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑦 ∈ V ↦ {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ (𝑤 ∩ 𝑥) ⊆ 𝑦}) & ⊢ 𝐹 = (rec(𝐺, ∅) ↾ ω) & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐹‘𝐴) ⊆ 𝑥) | ||
| Theorem | inf3lem1 9597* | Lemma for our Axiom of Infinity => standard Axiom of Infinity. See inf3 9604 for detailed description. (Contributed by NM, 28-Oct-1996.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑦 ∈ V ↦ {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ (𝑤 ∩ 𝑥) ⊆ 𝑦}) & ⊢ 𝐹 = (rec(𝐺, ∅) ↾ ω) & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐹‘𝐴) ⊆ (𝐹‘suc 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | inf3lem2 9598* | Lemma for our Axiom of Infinity => standard Axiom of Infinity. See inf3 9604 for detailed description. (Contributed by NM, 28-Oct-1996.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑦 ∈ V ↦ {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ (𝑤 ∩ 𝑥) ⊆ 𝑦}) & ⊢ 𝐹 = (rec(𝐺, ∅) ↾ ω) & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑥 ≠ ∅ ∧ 𝑥 ⊆ ∪ 𝑥) → (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐹‘𝐴) ≠ 𝑥)) | ||
| Theorem | inf3lem3 9599* | Lemma for our Axiom of Infinity => standard Axiom of Infinity. See inf3 9604 for detailed description. In the proof, we invoke the Axiom of Regularity in the form of zfreg 9558. (Contributed by NM, 29-Oct-1996.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑦 ∈ V ↦ {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ (𝑤 ∩ 𝑥) ⊆ 𝑦}) & ⊢ 𝐹 = (rec(𝐺, ∅) ↾ ω) & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑥 ≠ ∅ ∧ 𝑥 ⊆ ∪ 𝑥) → (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐹‘𝐴) ≠ (𝐹‘suc 𝐴))) | ||
| Theorem | inf3lem4 9600* | Lemma for our Axiom of Infinity => standard Axiom of Infinity. See inf3 9604 for detailed description. (Contributed by NM, 29-Oct-1996.) |
| ⊢ 𝐺 = (𝑦 ∈ V ↦ {𝑤 ∈ 𝑥 ∣ (𝑤 ∩ 𝑥) ⊆ 𝑦}) & ⊢ 𝐹 = (rec(𝐺, ∅) ↾ ω) & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑥 ≠ ∅ ∧ 𝑥 ⊆ ∪ 𝑥) → (𝐴 ∈ ω → (𝐹‘𝐴) ⊊ (𝐹‘suc 𝐴))) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |