Theorem eximp-surprise 42339

Description: Show what implication inside "there exists" really expands to (using implication directly inside "there exists" is usually a mistake).

Those inexperienced with formal notations of classical logic may use expressions combining "there exists" with implication. That is usually a mistake, because as proven using imor 427, such an expression can be rewritten using not with or - and that is often not what the author intended. New users of formal notation who use "there exists" with an implication should consider if they meant "and" instead of "implies". A stark example is shown in eximp-surprise2 42340. See also alimp-surprise 42335 and empty-surprise 42337. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 17-Oct-2018.)

Assertion

Ref	Expression
eximp-surprise	⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ∃𝑥(¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))

Proof of Theorem eximp-surprise

Step	Hyp	Ref	Expression
1		imor 427	. 2 ⊢ ((𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ (¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))
2	1	exbii 1764	1 ⊢ (∃𝑥(𝜑 → 𝜓) ↔ ∃𝑥(¬ 𝜑 ∨ 𝜓))

Syntax hints:  ¬ wn 3   → wi 4   ↔ wb 195   ∨ wo 382  ∃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

This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 196  df-or 384  df-ex 1696

This theorem is referenced by:  eximp-surprise2  42340