| Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 96 of 510) | < 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: | (1-31502) |
(31503-33025) |
(33026-50934) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | ordtypelem6 9501* | Lemma for ordtype 9510. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = recs(𝐺) & ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ ∀𝑗 ∈ ran ℎ 𝑗𝑅𝑤} & ⊢ 𝐺 = (ℎ ∈ V ↦ (℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐶 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝐶 ¬ 𝑢𝑅𝑣)) & ⊢ 𝑇 = {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ ∃𝑡 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ (𝐹 “ 𝑥)𝑧𝑅𝑡} & ⊢ 𝑂 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 We 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑀 ∈ dom 𝑂) → (𝑁 ∈ 𝑀 → (𝑂‘𝑁)𝑅(𝑂‘𝑀))) | ||
| Theorem | ordtypelem7 9502* | Lemma for ordtype 9510. ran 𝑂 is an initial segment of 𝐴 under the well-order 𝑅. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = recs(𝐺) & ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ ∀𝑗 ∈ ran ℎ 𝑗𝑅𝑤} & ⊢ 𝐺 = (ℎ ∈ V ↦ (℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐶 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝐶 ¬ 𝑢𝑅𝑣)) & ⊢ 𝑇 = {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ ∃𝑡 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ (𝐹 “ 𝑥)𝑧𝑅𝑡} & ⊢ 𝑂 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 We 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝜑 ∧ 𝑁 ∈ 𝐴) ∧ 𝑀 ∈ dom 𝑂) → ((𝑂‘𝑀)𝑅𝑁 ∨ 𝑁 ∈ ran 𝑂)) | ||
| Theorem | ordtypelem8 9503* | Lemma for ordtype 9510. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = recs(𝐺) & ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ ∀𝑗 ∈ ran ℎ 𝑗𝑅𝑤} & ⊢ 𝐺 = (ℎ ∈ V ↦ (℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐶 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝐶 ¬ 𝑢𝑅𝑣)) & ⊢ 𝑇 = {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ ∃𝑡 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ (𝐹 “ 𝑥)𝑧𝑅𝑡} & ⊢ 𝑂 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 We 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑂 Isom E , 𝑅 (dom 𝑂, ran 𝑂)) | ||
| Theorem | ordtypelem9 9504* | Lemma for ordtype 9510. Either the function OrdIso is an isomorphism onto all of 𝐴, or OrdIso is not a set, which by oif 9508 implies that either ran 𝑂 ⊆ 𝐴 is a proper class or dom 𝑂 = On. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) (Revised by AV, 28-Jul-2024.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = recs(𝐺) & ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ ∀𝑗 ∈ ran ℎ 𝑗𝑅𝑤} & ⊢ 𝐺 = (ℎ ∈ V ↦ (℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐶 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝐶 ¬ 𝑢𝑅𝑣)) & ⊢ 𝑇 = {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ ∃𝑡 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ (𝐹 “ 𝑥)𝑧𝑅𝑡} & ⊢ 𝑂 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 We 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑂 ∈ 𝑉) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑂 Isom E , 𝑅 (dom 𝑂, 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | ordtypelem10 9505* | Lemma for ordtype 9510. Using ax-rep 5232, exclude the possibility that 𝑂 is a proper class and does not enumerate all of 𝐴. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = recs(𝐺) & ⊢ 𝐶 = {𝑤 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ ∀𝑗 ∈ ran ℎ 𝑗𝑅𝑤} & ⊢ 𝐺 = (ℎ ∈ V ↦ (℩𝑣 ∈ 𝐶 ∀𝑢 ∈ 𝐶 ¬ 𝑢𝑅𝑣)) & ⊢ 𝑇 = {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ ∃𝑡 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ (𝐹 “ 𝑥)𝑧𝑅𝑡} & ⊢ 𝑂 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 We 𝐴) & ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Se 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑂 Isom E , 𝑅 (dom 𝑂, 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | oi0 9506 | Definition of the ordinal isomorphism when its arguments are not meaningful. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (¬ (𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ 𝑅 Se 𝐴) → 𝐹 = ∅) | ||
| Theorem | oicl 9507 | The order type of the well-order 𝑅 on 𝐴 is an ordinal. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 23-May-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ Ord dom 𝐹 | ||
| Theorem | oif 9508 | The order isomorphism of the well-order 𝑅 on 𝐴 is a function. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 23-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ 𝐹:dom 𝐹⟶𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | oiiso2 9509 | The order isomorphism of the well-order 𝑅 on 𝐴 is an isomorphism onto ran 𝑂 (which is a subset of 𝐴 by oif 9508). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ 𝑅 Se 𝐴) → 𝐹 Isom E , 𝑅 (dom 𝐹, ran 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | ordtype 9510 | For any set-like well-ordered class, there is an isomorphic ordinal number called its order type. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 17-Oct-2009.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ 𝑅 Se 𝐴) → 𝐹 Isom E , 𝑅 (dom 𝐹, 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | oiiniseg 9511 | ran 𝐹 is an initial segment of 𝐴 under the well-order 𝑅. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (((𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ 𝑅 Se 𝐴) ∧ (𝑁 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑀 ∈ dom 𝐹)) → ((𝐹‘𝑀)𝑅𝑁 ∨ 𝑁 ∈ ran 𝐹)) | ||
| Theorem | ordtype2 9512 | For any set-like well-ordered class, if the order isomorphism exists (is a set), then it maps some ordinal onto 𝐴 isomorphically. Otherwise, 𝐹 is a proper class, which implies that either ran 𝐹 ⊆ 𝐴 is a proper class or dom 𝐹 = On. This weak version of ordtype 9510 does not require the Axiom of Replacement. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑅 We 𝐴 ∧ 𝑅 Se 𝐴 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ V) → 𝐹 Isom E , 𝑅 (dom 𝐹, 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | oiexg 9513 | The order isomorphism on a set is a set. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝐹 ∈ V) | ||
| Theorem | oion 9514 | The order type of the well-order 𝑅 on 𝐴 is an ordinal. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 23-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → dom 𝐹 ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | oiiso 9515 | The order isomorphism of the well-order 𝑅 on 𝐴 is an isomorphism. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 23-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑅 We 𝐴) → 𝐹 Isom E , 𝑅 (dom 𝐹, 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | oien 9516 | The order type of a well-ordered set is equinumerous to the set. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 23-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso(𝑅, 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝑅 We 𝐴) → dom 𝐹 ≈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | oieu 9517 | 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 9518 | 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 5232 (the second statement is trivial under ax-rep 5232). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 26-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ 𝐹 = OrdIso( E , 𝐴) ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ On → (Smo 𝐹 ∧ ran 𝐹 = 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | oiid 9519 | 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 9520* | Lemma for hartogs 9522. (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 9521* | Lemma for hartogs 9522. (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 9522* | The class of ordinals dominated by a given set is an ordinal. A shorter (when taking into account lemmas hartogslem1 9520 and hartogslem2 9521) proof can be given using the axiom of choice, see ondomon 10628. As its label indicates, this result is used to justify the definition of the Hartogs function df-har 9535. (Contributed by Jeff Hankins, 22-Oct-2009.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≼ 𝐴} ∈ On) | ||
| Theorem | wofib 9523 | 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 9524* | 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 9525* | Lemma for wemapso 9529. 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 9526* | Lemma for wemapso 9529. 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 9527* |
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 9528* | Lemma for wemapso 9529. (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 9529* | 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 9530* | Lemma for wemapso2 9531. (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 9531* | An alternative to having a well-order on 𝑅 in wemapso 9529 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 9532* | The alternate definition of the cardinal of a set given in cardval2 10053 always gives a set, and indeed an ordinal. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 14-Jan-2013.) |
| ⊢ {𝑥 ∈ On ∣ 𝑥 ≺ 𝐴} ∈ On | ||
| Theorem | card2inf 9533* | The alternate definition of the cardinal of a set given in cardval2 10053 has the curious property that for non-numerable sets (for which ndmfv 6909 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 9534 | Class symbol for the Hartogs function. |
| class har | ||
| Definition | df-har 9535* |
Define the Hartogs function as mapping a set to the class of ordinals it
dominates. That class is an ordinal by hartogs 9522, which is used in
harf 9536.
The Hartogs number of a set is the least ordinal not dominated by that set. Theorem harval2 10059 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 10060. 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 10002. 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 9536 | Functionality of the Hartogs function. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ har:V⟶On | ||
| Theorem | harcl 9537 | 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 9538* | Function value of the Hartogs function. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 → (har‘𝑋) = {𝑦 ∈ On ∣ 𝑦 ≼ 𝑋}) | ||
| Theorem | elharval 9539 | The Hartogs number of a set contains exactly the ordinals that set dominates. Combined with harcl 9537, 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 9540 | 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 9541 | Weak ordering property of the Hartogs function. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 14-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≼ 𝑌 → (har‘𝑋) ⊆ (har‘𝑌)) | ||
| Syntax | cwdom 9542 | Class symbol for the weak dominance relation. |
| class ≼* | ||
| Definition | df-wdom 9543* | 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 8959) implies weak dominance (over ZF). The principle asserting the converse is known as the partition principle and is independent of ZF. Theorem fodom 10582 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 9544 | Weak dominance is a relation. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ Rel ≼* | ||
| Theorem | brwdom 9545* | 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 9546* | Property of weak dominance, forward direction only. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 5-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≼* 𝑌 → (𝑋 = ∅ ∨ ∃𝑧 𝑧:𝑌–onto→𝑋)) | ||
| Theorem | brwdomn0 9547* | 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 9548 | Any set weakly dominates the empty set. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 → ∅ ≼* 𝑋) | ||
| Theorem | fowdom 9549 | An onto function implies weak dominance. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐹 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐹:𝑌–onto→𝑋) → 𝑋 ≼* 𝑌) | ||
| Theorem | wdomref 9550 | Reflexivity of weak dominance. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ∈ 𝑉 → 𝑋 ≼* 𝑋) | ||
| Theorem | brwdom2 9551* | 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 9552 | Weak dominance is implied by dominance in the usual sense. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 11-Feb-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝑋 ≼ 𝑌 → 𝑋 ≼* 𝑌) | ||
| Theorem | wdomtr 9553 | 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 9554 | Equality-like theorem for equinumerosity and weak dominance. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 18-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ≈ 𝐵 → (𝐴 ≼* 𝐶 ↔ 𝐵 ≼* 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | wdomen2 9555 | Equality-like theorem for equinumerosity and weak dominance. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 18-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ≈ 𝐵 → (𝐶 ≼* 𝐴 ↔ 𝐶 ≼* 𝐵)) | ||
| Theorem | wdompwdom 9556 | 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 9557 | Cantor's Theorem, stated using weak dominance (this is actually a stronger statement than canth2 9133, equivalent to canth 7366). (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝒫 𝐴 ≼* 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | wdom2d 9558* | Deduce weak dominance from an implicit onto function (stated in a way which avoids ax-rep 5232). (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 9559* | 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 9560* | Condition for weak dominance with a condition reminiscent of wdomd 9559. (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 9561* | 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 9562 | 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 9563 | 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 9564 | A set is weakly dominant over its image under any function. This version of wdomimag 9565 is stated so as to avoid ax-rep 5232. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 25-Jun-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((Fun 𝐹 ∧ 𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐹 “ 𝐴) ≼* 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | wdomimag 9565 | 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 9566 | Lemma for unxpwdom 9567. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 15-May-2015.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 × 𝐴) ≈ (𝐵 ∪ 𝐶) → (𝐴 ≼* 𝐵 ∨ 𝐴 ≼ 𝐶)) | ||
| Theorem | unxpwdom 9567 | 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 9568* | Describe an onto function from the indexed cartesian product to the indexed union. Together with ixpssmapg 8940 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 9569 | 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 9522 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 9570* | 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 9574) that every nonempty set contains a set disjoint from itself. One consequence is that it denies the existence of a set containing itself (elirrv 9575). A stronger version that works for proper classes is proved as zfregs 9717. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-1993.) |
| ⊢ (∃𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → ∃𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑥))) | ||
| Theorem | axreg2 9571* | Axiom of Regularity expressed more compactly. (Contributed by NM, 14-Aug-2003.) |
| ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 → ∃𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ∧ ∀𝑧(𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 → ¬ 𝑧 ∈ 𝑦))) | ||
| Theorem | zfregcl 9572* | 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 2178 and ax-12 2213. (Revised by TM, 31-Dec-2025.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (∃𝑥 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴)) | ||
| Theorem | zfregclOLD 9573* | Obsolete version of zfregcl 9572 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 9574* | 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 9717). (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 9575 | 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 9589 and efrirr 5631 (see elirrvALT 9590), but this proof is direct from ax-reg 9570. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) Reduce axiom dependencies and make use of ax-reg 9570 directly. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 27-Dec-2025.) Avoid ax-pr 5391. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 21-May-2026.) (Proof shortened by Matthew House, 23-May-2026.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | elirrvOLD 9576 | Obsolete version of elirrv 9575 as of 21-May-2026. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) Reduce axiom dependencies and make use of ax-reg 9570 directly. (Revised by BTernaryTau, 27-Dec-2025.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | elirrvOLDOLD 9577 | Obsolete version of elirrv 9575 as of 27-Dec-2025. (Contributed by NM, 19-Aug-1993.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | elirr 9578 | 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 9579 | A class is not equal to any of its elements. (Contributed by AV, 14-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ≠ 𝐵) | ||
| Theorem | nelaneq 9580 | A class is not an element of and equal to a class at the same time. Variant of elneq 9579 analogously to elnotel 9595 and en2lp 9591. (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 9581 | Obsolete version of nelaneq 9580 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 9582 | Obsolete version of nelaneq 9580 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 9583 | The membership relation and the identity relation are disjoint. Variable-free version of nelaneq 9580. (Proposed by BJ, 18-Jun-2022.) (Contributed by AV, 18-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ ( E ∩ I ) = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | sucprcreg 9584 | 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 9585 | Obsolete version of sucprcreg 9584 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 9586 | 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 9587 | Alternate proof of ru 3738, simplified using (indirectly) the Axiom of Regularity ax-reg 9570. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 4-Oct-2008.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ {𝑥 ∣ 𝑥 ∉ 𝑥} ∉ V | ||
| Theorem | disjcsn 9588 | 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 9589 | The membership relation is well-founded on any class. (Contributed by NM, 26-Nov-1995.) |
| ⊢ E Fr 𝐴 | ||
| Theorem | elirrvALT 9590 | Alternate proof of elirrv 9575, shorter but using more axioms. (Contributed by BTernaryTau, 28-Dec-2025.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑥 | ||
| Theorem | en2lp 9591 | 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 9592 | Two classes are not elements of each other simultaneously. This is just a rewriting of en2lp 9591 and serves as an example in the context of Godel codes, see elnanelprv 36163. (Contributed by AV, 5-Nov-2023.) (New usage is discouraged.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ⊼ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | cnvepnep 9593 | The membership (epsilon) relation and its converse are disjoint, i.e., E is an asymmetric relation. Variable-free version of en2lp 9591. (Proposed by BJ, 18-Jun-2022.) (Contributed by AV, 19-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (◡ E ∩ E ) = ∅ | ||
| Theorem | epnsym 9594 | The membership (epsilon) relation is not symmetric. (Contributed by AV, 18-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ ◡ E ≠ E | ||
| Theorem | elnotel 9595 | A class cannot be an element of one of its elements. (Contributed by AV, 14-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → ¬ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | elnel 9596 | A class cannot be an element of one of its elements. (Contributed by AV, 14-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → 𝐵 ∉ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | en3lplem1 9597* | Lemma for en3lp 9599. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝑥 ∩ {𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶}) ≠ ∅)) | ||
| Theorem | en3lplem2 9598* | Lemma for en3lp 9599. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 28-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝑥 ∈ {𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶} → (𝑥 ∩ {𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶}) ≠ ∅)) | ||
| Theorem | en3lp 9599 | No class has 3-cycle membership loops. This proof was automatically generated from the virtual deduction proof en3lpVD 45786 using a translation program. (Contributed by Alan Sare, 24-Oct-2011.) |
| ⊢ ¬ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴) | ||
| Theorem | preleqg 9600 | Equality of two unordered pairs when one member of each pair contains the other member. Closed form of preleq 9601. (Contributed by AV, 15-Jun-2022.) |
| ⊢ (((𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ {𝐴, 𝐵} = {𝐶, 𝐷}) → (𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷)) | ||
| < Previous Next > |
| Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |