Theorem dtru 4783

Description: At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). Note that we may not substitute the same variable for both 𝑥 and 𝑦 (as indicated by the distinct variable requirement), for otherwise we would contradict stdpc6 1944.

This theorem is proved directly from set theory axioms (no set theory definitions) and does not use ax-ext 2590 or ax-sep 4709. See dtruALT 4826 for a shorter proof using these axioms.

The proof makes use of dummy variables 𝑧 and 𝑤 which do not appear in the final theorem. They must be distinct from each other and from 𝑥 and 𝑦. In other words, if we were to substitute 𝑥 for 𝑧 throughout the proof, the proof would fail. (Contributed by NM, 7-Nov-2006.)

Assertion

Ref	Expression
dtru	⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦

Distinct variable group:   𝑥,𝑦

Proof of Theorem dtru

Dummy variables 𝑤 𝑧 are mutually distinct and distinct from all other variables.

Step	Hyp	Ref	Expression
1		el 4773	. . . 4 ⊢ ∃𝑤 𝑥 ∈ 𝑤
2		ax-nul 4717	. . . . 5 ⊢ ∃𝑧∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧
3		sp 2041	. . . . 5 ⊢ (∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 → ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧)
4	2, 3	eximii 1754	. . . 4 ⊢ ∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧
5		eeanv 2170	. . . 4 ⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) ↔ (∃𝑤 𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧))
6	1, 4, 5	mpbir2an 957	. . 3 ⊢ ∃𝑤∃𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧)
7		ax9 1990	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (𝑤 = 𝑧 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧))
8	7	com12 32	. . . . 5 ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 → (𝑤 = 𝑧 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧))
9	8	con3dimp 456	. . . 4 ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧)
10	9	2eximi 1753	. . 3 ⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → ∃𝑤∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧)
11		equequ2 1940	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝑤 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑤 = 𝑦))
12	11	notbid 307	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 ↔ ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦))
13		ax7 1930	. . . . . . . 8 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑤 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑤 = 𝑦))
14	13	con3d 147	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑤 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
15	14	spimev 2247	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
16	12, 15	syl6bi 242	. . . . 5 ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
17		ax7 1930	. . . . . . . 8 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 = 𝑦))
18	17	con3d 147	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
19	18	spimev 2247	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
20	19	a1d 25	. . . . 5 ⊢ (¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
21	16, 20	pm2.61i 175	. . . 4 ⊢ (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
22	21	exlimivv 1847	. . 3 ⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
23	6, 10, 22	mp2b 10	. 2 ⊢ ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦
24		exnal 1744	. 2 ⊢ (∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
25	23, 24	mpbi 219	1 ⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦

Syntax hints:  ¬ wn 3   → wi 4   ∧ wa 383  ∀wal 1473  ∃wex 1695

This theorem was proved from axioms:  ax-mp 5  ax-1 6  ax-2 7  ax-3 8  ax-gen 1713  ax-4 1728  ax-5 1827  ax-6 1875  ax-7 1922  ax-8 1979  ax-9 1986  ax-10 2006  ax-11 2021  ax-12 2034  ax-13 2234  ax-nul 4717  ax-pow 4769

This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 196  df-or 384  df-an 385  df-tru 1478  df-ex 1696  df-nf 1701

This theorem is referenced by:  axc16b  4784  eunex  4785  nfnid  4823  dtrucor  4827  dvdemo1  4829  brprcneu  6096  zfcndpow  9317