Home | Metamath
Proof Explorer Theorem List (p. 50 of 424) | < 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: | Metamath Proof Explorer
(1-27159) |
Hilbert Space Explorer
(27160-28684) |
Users' Mathboxes
(28685-42360) |
Type | Label | Description |
---|---|---|
Statement | ||
Theorem | opthwiener 4901 | Justification theorem for the ordered pair definition in Norbert Wiener, "A simplification of the logic of relations," Proc. of the Cambridge Philos. Soc., 1914, vol. 17, pp.387-390. It is also shown as a definition in [Enderton] p. 36 and as Exercise 4.8(b) of [Mendelson] p. 230. It is meaningful only for classes that exist as sets (i.e. are not proper classes). See df-op 4132 for other ordered pair definitions. (Contributed by NM, 28-Sep-2003.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ({{{𝐴}, ∅}, {{𝐵}}} = {{{𝐶}, ∅}, {{𝐷}}} ↔ (𝐴 = 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 = 𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | uniop 4902 | The union of an ordered pair. Theorem 65 of [Suppes] p. 39. (Contributed by NM, 17-Aug-2004.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2015.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ ∪ 〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 = {𝐴, 𝐵} | ||
Theorem | uniopel 4903 | Ordered pair membership is inherited by class union. (Contributed by NM, 13-May-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 26-Apr-2015.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ 𝐶 → ∪ 〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ ∪ 𝐶) | ||
Theorem | otsndisj 4904* | The singletons consisting of ordered triples which have distinct third components are disjoint. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 10-Mar-2018.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑌) → Disj 𝑐 ∈ 𝑉 {〈𝐴, 𝐵, 𝑐〉}) | ||
Theorem | otiunsndisj 4905* | The union of singletons consisting of ordered triples which have distinct first and third components are disjoint. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 10-Mar-2018.) |
⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑋 → Disj 𝑎 ∈ 𝑉 ∪ 𝑐 ∈ (𝑊 ∖ {𝑎}){〈𝑎, 𝐵, 𝑐〉}) | ||
Theorem | iunopeqop 4906* | Implication of an ordered pair being equal to an indexed union of singletons of ordered pairs. (Contributed by AV, 20-Sep-2020.) |
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐶 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐷 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 ≠ ∅ → (∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 {〈𝑥, 𝐵〉} = 〈𝐶, 𝐷〉 → ∃𝑧 𝐴 = {𝑧})) | ||
Theorem | opabid 4907 | The law of concretion. Special case of Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by NM, 14-Apr-1995.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
⊢ (〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜑) | ||
Theorem | elopab 4908* | Membership in a class abstraction of pairs. (Contributed by NM, 24-Mar-1998.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦(𝐴 = 〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∧ 𝜑)) | ||
Theorem | opelopabsbALT 4909* | The law of concretion in terms of substitutions. Less general than opelopabsb 4910, but having a much shorter proof. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2002.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
⊢ (〈𝑧, 𝑤〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝑤 / 𝑦][𝑧 / 𝑥]𝜑) | ||
Theorem | opelopabsb 4910* | The law of concretion in terms of substitutions. (Contributed by NM, 30-Sep-2002.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.) |
⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥][𝐵 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
Theorem | brabsb 4911* | The law of concretion in terms of substitutions. (Contributed by NM, 17-Mar-2008.) |
⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ [𝐴 / 𝑥][𝐵 / 𝑦]𝜑) | ||
Theorem | opelopabt 4912* | Closed theorem form of opelopab 4922. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-2013.) |
⊢ ((∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ∧ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ∧ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊)) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | opelopabga 4913* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | brabga 4914* | The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | opelopab2a 4915* | Ordered pair membership in an ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ 𝜑)} ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | opelopaba 4916* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | braba 4917* | The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by NM, 19-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | opelopabg 4918* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by NM, 28-May-1995.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | brabg 4919* | The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1999.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | opelopabgf 4920* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. This version of opelopabg 4918 uses bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 8-Jul-2018.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜒 & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | opelopab2 4921* | Ordered pair membership in an ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 14-Oct-2007.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) |
⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐷) → (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷) ∧ 𝜑)} ↔ 𝜒)) | ||
Theorem | opelopab 4922* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. (Contributed by NM, 16-May-1995.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | brab 4923* | The law of concretion for a binary relation. (Contributed by NM, 16-Aug-1999.) |
⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ 𝑅 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴𝑅𝐵 ↔ 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | opelopabaf 4924* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. This version of opelopab 4922 uses bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions." (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Dec-2013.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜓 & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ ((𝑥 = 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 = 𝐵) → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜓) | ||
Theorem | opelopabf 4925* | The law of concretion. Theorem 9.5 of [Quine] p. 61. This version of opelopab 4922 uses bound-variable hypotheses in place of distinct variable conditions." (Contributed by NM, 19-Dec-2008.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝜓 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑦𝜒 & ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V & ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝐴 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) & ⊢ (𝑦 = 𝐵 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (〈𝐴, 𝐵〉 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ↔ 𝜒) | ||
Theorem | ssopab2 4926 | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 19-May-2013.) |
⊢ (∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓) → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓}) | ||
Theorem | ssopab2b 4927 | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction subclass and implication. (Contributed by NM, 27-Dec-1996.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.) |
⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | ssopab2i 4928 | Inference of ordered pair abstraction subclass from implication. (Contributed by NM, 5-Apr-1995.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝜓) ⇒ ⊢ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ⊆ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} | ||
Theorem | ssopab2dv 4929* | Inference of ordered pair abstraction subclass from implication. (Contributed by NM, 19-Jan-2014.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2014.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 → 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} ⊆ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜒}) | ||
Theorem | eqopab2b 4930 | Equivalence of ordered pair abstraction equality and biconditional. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 4-Jan-2017.) |
⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜓} ↔ ∀𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)) | ||
Theorem | opabn0 4931 | Nonempty ordered pair class abstraction. (Contributed by NM, 10-Oct-2007.) |
⊢ ({〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} ≠ ∅ ↔ ∃𝑥∃𝑦𝜑) | ||
Theorem | csbopab 4932* | Move substitution into a class abstraction. Version of csbopabgALT 4933 without a sethood antecedent but depending on more axioms. (Contributed by NM, 6-Aug-2007.) (Revised by NM, 23-Aug-2018.) |
⊢ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌{〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑} | ||
Theorem | csbopabgALT 4933* | Move substitution into a class abstraction. Version of csbopab 4932 with a sethood antecedent but depending on fewer axioms. (Contributed by NM, 6-Aug-2007.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 17-Nov-2016.) (New usage is discouraged.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌{〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑦, 𝑧〉 ∣ [𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑}) | ||
Theorem | csbmpt12 4934* | Move substitution into a maps-to notation. (Contributed by AV, 26-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝑦 ∈ 𝑌 ↦ 𝑍) = (𝑦 ∈ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝑌 ↦ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝑍)) | ||
Theorem | csbmpt2 4935* | Move substitution into the second part of a maps-to notation. (Contributed by AV, 26-Sep-2019.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌(𝑦 ∈ 𝑌 ↦ 𝑍) = (𝑦 ∈ 𝑌 ↦ ⦋𝐴 / 𝑥⦌𝑍)) | ||
Theorem | iunopab 4936* | Move indexed union inside an ordered-pair abstraction. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Feb-2015.) |
⊢ ∪ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝜑} = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ ∃𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 𝜑} | ||
Theorem | elopabr 4937* | Membership in a class abstraction of pairs, defined by a binary relation. (Contributed by AV, 16-Feb-2021.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑥𝑅𝑦} → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑅) | ||
Theorem | elopabran 4938* | Membership in a class abstraction of pairs, defined by a restricted binary relation. (Contributed by AV, 16-Feb-2021.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ∈ {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝜓)} → 𝐴 ∈ 𝑅) | ||
Theorem | rbropapd 4939* | Properties of a pair in an extended binary relation. (Contributed by Alexander van der Vekens, 30-Oct-2017.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 = {〈𝑓, 𝑝〉 ∣ (𝑓𝑊𝑝 ∧ 𝜓)}) & ⊢ ((𝑓 = 𝐹 ∧ 𝑝 = 𝑃) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐹 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝑃 ∈ 𝑌) → (𝐹𝑀𝑃 ↔ (𝐹𝑊𝑃 ∧ 𝜒)))) | ||
Theorem | rbropap 4940* | Properties of a pair in a restricted binary relation 𝑀 expressed as an ordered-pair class abstraction: 𝑀 is the binary relation 𝑊 restricted by the condition 𝜓. (Contributed by AV, 31-Jan-2021.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 = {〈𝑓, 𝑝〉 ∣ (𝑓𝑊𝑝 ∧ 𝜓)}) & ⊢ ((𝑓 = 𝐹 ∧ 𝑝 = 𝑃) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝑃 ∈ 𝑌) → (𝐹𝑀𝑃 ↔ (𝐹𝑊𝑃 ∧ 𝜒))) | ||
Theorem | 2rbropap 4941* | Properties of a pair in a restricted binary relation 𝑀 expressed as an ordered-pair class abstraction: 𝑀 is the binary relation 𝑊 restricted by the conditions 𝜓 and 𝜏. (Contributed by AV, 31-Jan-2021.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 = {〈𝑓, 𝑝〉 ∣ (𝑓𝑊𝑝 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜏)}) & ⊢ ((𝑓 = 𝐹 ∧ 𝑝 = 𝑃) → (𝜓 ↔ 𝜒)) & ⊢ ((𝑓 = 𝐹 ∧ 𝑝 = 𝑃) → (𝜏 ↔ 𝜃)) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝐹 ∈ 𝑋 ∧ 𝑃 ∈ 𝑌) → (𝐹𝑀𝑃 ↔ (𝐹𝑊𝑃 ∧ 𝜒 ∧ 𝜃))) | ||
Theorem | pwin 4942 | The power class of the intersection of two classes is the intersection of their power classes. Exercise 4.12(j) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) = (𝒫 𝐴 ∩ 𝒫 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | pwunss 4943 | The power class of the union of two classes includes the union of their power classes. Exercise 4.12(k) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ (𝒫 𝐴 ∪ 𝒫 𝐵) ⊆ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | pwssun 4944 | The power class of the union of two classes is a subset of the union of their power classes, iff one class is a subclass of the other. Exercise 4.12(l) of [Mendelson] p. 235. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴) ↔ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ⊆ (𝒫 𝐴 ∪ 𝒫 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | pwundif 4945 | Break up the power class of a union into a union of smaller classes. (Contributed by NM, 25-Mar-2007.) (Proof shortened by Thierry Arnoux, 20-Dec-2016.) |
⊢ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) = ((𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∖ 𝒫 𝐴) ∪ 𝒫 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | pwun 4946 | The power class of the union of two classes equals the union of their power classes, iff one class is a subclass of the other. Part of Exercise 7(b) of [Enderton] p. 28. (Contributed by NM, 23-Nov-2003.) |
⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∨ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴) ↔ 𝒫 (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) = (𝒫 𝐴 ∪ 𝒫 𝐵)) | ||
Syntax | cep 4947 | Extend class notation to include the epsilon relation. |
class E | ||
Syntax | cid 4948 | Extend the definition of a class to include identity relation. |
class I | ||
Definition | df-eprel 4949* | Define the epsilon relation. Similar to Definition 6.22 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 30. The epsilon relation and set membership are the same, that is, (𝐴 E 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵) when 𝐵 is a set by epelg 4950. Thus, 5 E {1, 5} (ex-eprel 26682). (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.) |
⊢ E = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦} | ||
Theorem | epelg 4950 | The epsilon relation and membership are the same. General version of epel 4952. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 27-Mar-2011.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 28-Apr-2015.) |
⊢ (𝐵 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 E 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | epelc 4951 | The epsilon relationship and the membership relation are the same. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 11-Apr-2012.) |
⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V ⇒ ⊢ (𝐴 E 𝐵 ↔ 𝐴 ∈ 𝐵) | ||
Theorem | epel 4952 | The epsilon relation and the membership relation are the same. (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.) |
⊢ (𝑥 E 𝑦 ↔ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦) | ||
Definition | df-id 4953* | Define the identity relation. Definition 9.15 of [Quine] p. 64. For example, 5 I 5 and ¬ 4 I 5 (ex-id 26683). (Contributed by NM, 13-Aug-1995.) |
⊢ I = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑥 = 𝑦} | ||
Theorem | dfid3 4954 | A stronger version of df-id 4953 that doesn't require 𝑥 and 𝑦 to be distinct. Ordinarily, we wouldn't use this as a definition, since non-distinct dummy variables would make soundness verification more difficult (as the proof here shows). The proof can be instructive in showing how distinct variable requirements may be eliminated, a task that is not necessarily obvious. (Contributed by NM, 5-Feb-2008.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.) |
⊢ I = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑥 = 𝑦} | ||
Theorem | dfid4 4955 | The identity function using maps-to notation. (Contributed by Scott Fenton, 15-Dec-2017.) |
⊢ I = (𝑥 ∈ V ↦ 𝑥) | ||
Theorem | dfid2 4956 | Alternate definition of the identity relation. (Contributed by NM, 15-Mar-2007.) |
⊢ I = {〈𝑥, 𝑥〉 ∣ 𝑥 = 𝑥} | ||
Syntax | wpo 4957 | Extend wff notation to include the strict partial ordering predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is a partial order on 𝐴.' |
wff 𝑅 Po 𝐴 | ||
Syntax | wor 4958 | Extend wff notation to include the strict complete ordering predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 orders 𝐴.' |
wff 𝑅 Or 𝐴 | ||
Definition | df-po 4959* | Define the strict partial order predicate. Definition of [Enderton] p. 168. The expression 𝑅 Po 𝐴 means 𝑅 is a partial order on 𝐴. For example, < Po ℝ is true, while ≤ Po ℝ is false (ex-po 26684). (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝐴 (¬ 𝑥𝑅𝑥 ∧ ((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧))) | ||
Definition | df-so 4960* | Define the strict complete (linear) order predicate. The expression 𝑅 Or 𝐴 is true if relationship 𝑅 orders 𝐴. For example, < Or ℝ is true (ltso 9997). Equivalent to Definition 6.19(1) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 29. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
⊢ (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∨ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦𝑅𝑥))) | ||
Theorem | poss 4961 | Subset theorem for the partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Mario Carneiro, 18-Nov-2016.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → (𝑅 Po 𝐵 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | poeq1 4962 | Equality theorem for partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Po 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | poeq2 4963 | Equality theorem for partial ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Po 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Po 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | nfpo 4964 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for partial orders. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑅 Po 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | nfso 4965 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for total orders. (Contributed by Stefan O'Rear, 20-Jan-2015.) |
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝑅 & ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ Ⅎ𝑥 𝑅 Or 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | pocl 4966 | Properties of partial order relation in class notation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (𝑅 Po 𝐴 → ((𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴) → (¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵 ∧ ((𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷)))) | ||
Theorem | ispod 4967* | Sufficient conditions for a partial order. (Contributed by NM, 9-Jul-2014.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝑥𝑅𝑥) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | swopolem 4968* | Perform the substitutions into the strict weak ordering law. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 31-Dec-2014.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 → (𝑥𝑅𝑧 ∨ 𝑧𝑅𝑦))) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑋 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑌 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑍 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑋𝑅𝑌 → (𝑋𝑅𝑍 ∨ 𝑍𝑅𝑌))) | ||
Theorem | swopo 4969* | A strict weak order is a partial order. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) |
⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑦𝑅𝑧 → ¬ 𝑧𝑅𝑦)) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 → (𝑥𝑅𝑧 ∨ 𝑧𝑅𝑦))) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | poirr 4970 | A partial order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵) | ||
Theorem | potr 4971 | A partial order relation is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | po2nr 4972 | A partial order relation has no 2-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | po3nr 4973 | A partial order relation has no 3-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 27-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷 ∧ 𝐷𝑅𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | po0 4974 | Any relation is a partial ordering of the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
⊢ 𝑅 Po ∅ | ||
Theorem | pofun 4975* | A function preserves a partial order relation. (Contributed by Jeff Madsen, 18-Jun-2011.) |
⊢ 𝑆 = {〈𝑥, 𝑦〉 ∣ 𝑋𝑅𝑌} & ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑋 = 𝑌) ⇒ ⊢ ((𝑅 Po 𝐵 ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 𝑋 ∈ 𝐵) → 𝑆 Po 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | sopo 4976 | A strict linear order is a strict partial order. (Contributed by NM, 28-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (𝑅 Or 𝐴 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | soss 4977 | Subset theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → (𝑅 Or 𝐵 → 𝑅 Or 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | soeq1 4978 | Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (𝑅 = 𝑆 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑆 Or 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | soeq2 4979 | Equality theorem for the strict ordering predicate. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (𝐴 = 𝐵 → (𝑅 Or 𝐴 ↔ 𝑅 Or 𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | sonr 4980 | A strict order relation is irreflexive. (Contributed by NM, 24-Nov-1995.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐴) → ¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐵) | ||
Theorem | sotr 4981 | A strict order relation is a transitive relation. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | solin 4982 | A strict order relation is linear (satisfies trichotomy). (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∨ 𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | so2nr 4983 | A strict order relation has no 2-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | so3nr 4984 | A strict order relation has no 3-cycle loops. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷 ∧ 𝐷𝑅𝐵)) | ||
Theorem | sotric 4985 | A strict order relation satisfies strict trichotomy. (Contributed by NM, 19-Feb-1996.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ↔ ¬ (𝐵 = 𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵))) | ||
Theorem | sotrieq 4986 | Trichotomy law for strict order relation. (Contributed by NM, 9-Apr-1996.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝐵 = 𝐶 ↔ ¬ (𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∨ 𝐶𝑅𝐵))) | ||
Theorem | sotrieq2 4987 | Trichotomy law for strict order relation. (Contributed by NM, 5-May-1999.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝐵 = 𝐶 ↔ (¬ 𝐵𝑅𝐶 ∧ ¬ 𝐶𝑅𝐵))) | ||
Theorem | sotr2 4988 | A transitivity relation. (Read 𝐵 ≤ 𝐶 and 𝐶 < 𝐷 implies 𝐵 < 𝐷.) (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 10-May-2013.) |
⊢ ((𝑅 Or 𝐴 ∧ (𝐵 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐷 ∈ 𝐴)) → ((¬ 𝐶𝑅𝐵 ∧ 𝐶𝑅𝐷) → 𝐵𝑅𝐷)) | ||
Theorem | issod 4989* | An irreflexive, transitive, linear relation is a strict ordering. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) |
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Po 𝐴) & ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴)) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∨ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦𝑅𝑥)) ⇒ ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑅 Or 𝐴) | ||
Theorem | issoi 4990* | An irreflexive, transitive, linear relation is a strict ordering. (Contributed by NM, 21-Jan-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) |
⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 → ¬ 𝑥𝑅𝑥) & ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴) → ((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧)) & ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∨ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦𝑅𝑥)) ⇒ ⊢ 𝑅 Or 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | isso2i 4991* | Deduce strict ordering from its properties. (Contributed by NM, 29-Jan-1996.) (Revised by Mario Carneiro, 9-Jul-2014.) |
⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴) → (𝑥𝑅𝑦 ↔ ¬ (𝑥 = 𝑦 ∨ 𝑦𝑅𝑥))) & ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑧 ∈ 𝐴) → ((𝑥𝑅𝑦 ∧ 𝑦𝑅𝑧) → 𝑥𝑅𝑧)) ⇒ ⊢ 𝑅 Or 𝐴 | ||
Theorem | so0 4992 | Any relation is a strict ordering of the empty set. (Contributed by NM, 16-Mar-1997.) (Proof shortened by Andrew Salmon, 25-Jul-2011.) |
⊢ 𝑅 Or ∅ | ||
Theorem | somo 4993* | A totally ordered set has at most one minimal element. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 24-Jun-2015.) (Revised by NM, 16-Jun-2017.) |
⊢ (𝑅 Or 𝐴 → ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ¬ 𝑦𝑅𝑥) | ||
Syntax | wfr 4994 | Extend wff notation to include the well-founded predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is a well-founded relation on 𝐴.' |
wff 𝑅 Fr 𝐴 | ||
Syntax | wse 4995 | Extend wff notation to include the set-like predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 is set-like on 𝐴.' |
wff 𝑅 Se 𝐴 | ||
Syntax | wwe 4996 | Extend wff notation to include the well-ordering predicate. Read: ' 𝑅 well-orders 𝐴.' |
wff 𝑅 We 𝐴 | ||
Definition | df-fr 4997* | Define the well-founded relation predicate. Definition 6.24(1) of [TakeutiZaring] p. 30. For alternate definitions, see dffr2 5003 and dffr3 5417. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥((𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝑥 ≠ ∅) → ∃𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ∀𝑧 ∈ 𝑥 ¬ 𝑧𝑅𝑦)) | ||
Definition | df-se 4998* | Define the set-like predicate. (Contributed by Mario Carneiro, 19-Nov-2014.) |
⊢ (𝑅 Se 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 {𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝑦𝑅𝑥} ∈ V) | ||
Definition | df-we 4999 | Define the well-ordering predicate. For an alternate definition, see dfwe2 6873. (Contributed by NM, 3-Apr-1994.) |
⊢ (𝑅 We 𝐴 ↔ (𝑅 Fr 𝐴 ∧ 𝑅 Or 𝐴)) | ||
Theorem | fri 5000* | Property of well-founded relation (one direction of definition). (Contributed by NM, 18-Mar-1997.) |
⊢ (((𝐵 ∈ 𝐶 ∧ 𝑅 Fr 𝐴) ∧ (𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴 ∧ 𝐵 ≠ ∅)) → ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∀𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ¬ 𝑦𝑅𝑥) |
< Previous Next > |
Copyright terms: Public domain | < Previous Next > |