Statement List for Metamath Proof Explorer - 901-1000 - Page 10 of 58
| Type | Label | Description |
| Statement |
| |
| Theorem | sbeq2 901 |
Substitution applied to atomic wff.
|
| ⊢
[y / x]y = x |
| |
| Theorem | sbequ8 902 |
Elimination of equality from antecedent after substitution.
|
| ⊢
([y / x]φ ↔
[y / x](x = y → φ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sbied 903 |
Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution (deduction
version of sbie 904).
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀xφ)
& ⊢ (φ → (χ → ∀xχ))
& ⊢ (φ → (x = y →
(ψ ↔ χ)))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → ([y / x]ψ ↔ χ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sbie 904 |
Conversion of implicit substitution to explicit substitution.
|
| ⊢
(ψ → ∀xψ)
& ⊢ (x = y →
(φ ↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢ ([y / x]φ ↔ ψ) |
| |
| Theorem | hbsb4 905 |
A variable not free remains so after substitution with a distinct
variable.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀zφ)
⇒ ⊢ (¬
∀z z = y →
([y / x]φ →
∀z[y / x]φ)) |
| |
| Theorem | hbsb4t 906 |
A variable not free remains so after substitution with a distinct
variable (closed form of hbsb4 905).
|
| ⊢
(∀x∀z(φ →
∀zφ) → (¬ ∀z z = y → ([y /
x]φ → ∀z[y / x]φ))) |
| |
| Theorem | ddelimf2 907 |
Proof of ddelimf 908 without using ax-11 801. This may be useful in a
study to determine whether ax-11 801 can be derived from the others,
which is currently unknown.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀xφ)
& ⊢ (ψ → ∀zψ)
& ⊢ (z = y →
(φ ↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢ (¬
∀x x = y →
(ψ → ∀xψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | ddelimf 908 |
Version of ddelim 1000 without any variable restrictions.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀xφ)
& ⊢ (ψ → ∀zψ)
& ⊢ (z = y →
(φ ↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢ (¬
∀x x = y →
(ψ → ∀xψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | ddelimdf 909 |
Deduction form of ddelimf 908. This version may be useful if we want to
avoid ax-17 925 and use ax-16 922
instead.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀xφ)
& ⊢ (φ → ∀zφ)
& ⊢ (φ → (ψ → ∀xψ))
& ⊢ (φ → (χ → ∀zχ))
& ⊢ (φ → (z = y →
(ψ ↔ χ)))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (¬ ∀x x = y → (χ
→ ∀xχ))) |
| |
| Theorem | sbco 910 |
A composition law for substitution.
|
| ⊢
([y / x][x / y]φ ↔
[y / x]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sbid2 911 |
An identity law for substitution.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀xφ)
⇒ ⊢ ([y / x][x / y]φ ↔ φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sbidm 912 |
An idempotent law for substitution.
|
| ⊢
([y / x][y / x]φ ↔
[y / x]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sbco2 913 |
A composition law for substitution.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀zφ)
⇒ ⊢ ([y / z][z / x]φ ↔ [y / x]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sbco2d 914 |
A composition law for substitution.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀xφ)
& ⊢ (φ → ∀zφ)
& ⊢ (φ → (ψ → ∀zψ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → ([y / z][z / x]ψ ↔ [y / x]ψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sbco3 915 |
A composition law for substitution.
|
| ⊢
([z / y][y / x]φ ↔
[z / x][x / y]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sbcom 916 |
A commutativity law for substitution.
|
| ⊢
([y / z][y / x]φ ↔
[y / x][y / z]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sb5f1 917 |
Equivalence for substitution. Similar to Theorem 6.2 of [Quine]
p. 40.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀xφ)
⇒ ⊢ (φ ↔ ∀x(x = y → [x /
y]φ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sb8 918 |
Substitution of variable in universal quantifier.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀yφ)
⇒ ⊢
(∀xφ ↔ ∀y[y / x]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sb8e 919 |
Substitution of variable in existential quantifier.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀yφ)
⇒ ⊢ (∃xφ ↔
∃y[y / x]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sb9i 920 |
Commutation of quantification and substitution variables.
|
| ⊢
(∀x[x / y]φ → ∀y[y / x]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sb9 921 |
Commutation of quantification and substitution variables.
|
| ⊢
(∀x[x / y]φ ↔ ∀y[y / x]φ) |
| |
| Axiom | ax-16 922 |
Axiom of Distinct Variables. The only axiom of predicate calculus
requiring that variables be distinct (if we consider ax-17 925
below to be
a metatheorem and not an axiom). Axiom scheme C16' in [Megill]
p. 448 (p. 16 of the preprint). It apparently does not otherwise
appear in the literature but is easily proved from textbook predicate
calculus by cases. It is a somewhat bizarre axiom since the antecedent
is always false in set theory (see dtru 1889)
but nonetheless technically
necessary as you can see from its uses.
|
| ⊢
(∀x x = y →
(φ → ∀xφ)) |
| |
| Theorem | ax17eq 923 |
Theorem to add distinct quantifier to atomic formula.
|
| ⊢
(x = y → ∀z x = y) |
| |
| Theorem | ax17el 924 |
Theorem to add distinct quantifier to atomic formula. (This theorem
demonstrates the induction basis for ax-17 925
considered as a
metatheorem. Do not use it for later proofs - use ax-17 925
instead, to
avoid reference to the redundant ax-15 806.)
|
| ⊢
(x ∈ y → ∀z x ∈
y) |
| |
| Axiom | ax-17 925 |
Axiom to quantify a variable over a formula in which it does not occur.
Axiom C5 in [Megill] p. 444 (p. 11 of
the preprint). Also appears as
Axiom B6 (p. 75) of system S2 of [Tarski] p. 77. If we allow ax-15 806
(not otherwise used in our development), this axiom is logically
redundant since it is a metatheorem justified by induction on the number
of primitive connectives in wff φ, using ax17eq 923 and ax17el 924
together hbne 699, hbal 700, and hbim 702.
However if we omit this axiom
our development would be quite inconvenient since we could work only
with specific instances of wffs containing no wff variables - this axiom
is effectively a definition of the concept of a set variable not
occurring in a wff (as opposed to just two set variables being
distinct).
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀xφ) |
| |
| Theorem | ax11a 926 |
This is a version of ax-11 801 when the variables are distinct.
Axiom (C8) of [Monk2] p. 105.
|
| ⊢
(x = y → (φ
→ ∀x(x = y →
φ))) |
| |
| Theorem | a4b 927 |
A weaker version of a4a 842.
|
| ⊢
(x = y → (φ
→ ψ))
⇒ ⊢
(∀xφ → ψ) |
| |
| Theorem | a4b1 928 |
Infer specialization rule from substitution instance.
|
| ⊢
(x = y → (φ
↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢
(∀xφ → ψ) |
| |
| Theorem | a4w 929 |
A weaker version of a4c 843.
|
| ⊢
(x = y → (φ
→ ψ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → ∃xψ) |
| |
| Theorem | a4w1 930 |
Infer existence from a substitution instance.
|
| ⊢
(x = y → (φ
↔ ψ))
& ⊢ ψ
⇒ ⊢ ∃xφ |
| |
| Theorem | eqvin.l2 931 |
A variable elimination law for equality. Lemma 15 of [Monk2] p. 109.
|
| ⊢
(∃z(x = z ∧
z = y)
→ x = y) |
| |
| Theorem | eqvin 932 |
A variable introduction law for equality. Lemma 15 of [Monk2]
p. 109.
|
| ⊢
(x = y ↔ ∃z(x = z ∧ z =
y)) |
| |
| Theorem | a16g 933 |
A generalization of axiom ax-16 922.
|
| ⊢
(∀x x = y →
(φ → ∀zφ)) |
| |
| Theorem | a16gb 934 |
A generalization of axiom ax-16 922.
|
| ⊢
(∀x x = y →
(φ ↔ ∀zφ)) |
| |
| Theorem | bialdv 935 |
Formula-building rule for universal quantifier (deduction rule).
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ ↔ χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∀xψ ↔
∀xχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | biexdv 936 |
Formula-building rule for existential quantifier (deduction rule).
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ ↔ χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∃xψ ↔
∃xχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | bi2aldv 937 |
Formula-building rule for 2 existential quantifiers (deduction rule).
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ ↔ χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∀x∀yψ ↔ ∀x∀yχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | bi2exdv 938 |
Formula-building rule for 2 existential quantifiers (deduction rule).
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ ↔ χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∃x∃yψ ↔ ∃x∃yχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | bi3exdv 939 |
Formula-building rule for 3 existential quantifiers (deduction rule).
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ ↔ χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∃x∃y∃zψ ↔ ∃x∃y∃zχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | bi4exdv 940 |
Formula-building rule for 4 existential quantifiers (deduction rule).
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ ↔ χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∃x∃y∃z∃wψ ↔ ∃x∃y∃z∃wχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.9rv 941 |
Special case of Theorem 19.9 of [Margaris] p.
89.
|
| ⊢
(φ ↔ ∃xφ) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.21v 942 |
Special case of Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris]
p. 90. Notational
convention: We sometimes suffix with "v" the label of a
theorem
eliminating a hypothesis such as (φ → ∀xφ) in 19.21 738
via the use of distinct variable conditions combined with ax-17 925.
Conversely, we sometimes suffix with "f" the label of a
theorem
introducing such a hypothesis to eliminate the need for the
distinct variable condition; e.g. euf 1011 derived from df-eu 1009.
The "f" stands for "not free in" which is less
restrictive than
"does not occur in".
|
| ⊢
(∀x(φ → ψ) ↔ (φ → ∀xψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.21aiv 943 |
Inference from Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ψ)
⇒ ⊢ (φ → ∀xψ) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.21aivv 944 |
Inference from Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ψ)
⇒ ⊢ (φ → ∀x∀yψ) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.21adv 945 |
Deduction from Theorem 19.21 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ → χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (ψ → ∀xχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.20dv 946 |
Deduction from Theorem 19.20 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ → χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∀xψ →
∀xχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.22dv 947 |
Deduction from Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ → χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∃xψ →
∃xχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.20dvv 948 |
Deduction from Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ → χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∀x∀yψ → ∀x∀yχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.22dvv 949 |
Deduction from Theorem 19.22 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ → χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∃x∃yψ → ∃x∃yχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.23v 950 |
Special case of Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris]
p. 90.
|
| ⊢
(∀x(φ → ψ) ↔ (∃xφ →
ψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.23vv 951 |
Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p. 90 extended to
two variables.
|
| ⊢
(∀x∀y(φ →
ψ) ↔ (∃x∃yφ → ψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.23aiv 952 |
Inference from Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ψ)
⇒ ⊢ (∃xφ →
ψ) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.23aivv 953 |
Inference from Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ψ)
⇒ ⊢ (∃x∃yφ → ψ) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.23adv 954 |
Deduction from Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ → χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∃xψ →
χ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.23advv 955 |
Deduction from Theorem 19.23 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
(φ → (ψ → χ))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∃x∃yψ → χ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.27v 956 |
Theorem 19.27 of [Margaris] p. 90.
|
| ⊢
(∀x(φ ∧ ψ) ↔ (∀xφ ∧
ψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.28v 957 |
Theorem 19.28 of [Margaris] p. 90.
|
| ⊢
(∀x(φ ∧ ψ) ↔ (φ ∧ ∀xψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.36v 958 |
Special case of Theorem 19.36 of [Margaris]
p. 90.
|
| ⊢
(∃x(φ → ψ) ↔ (∀xφ →
ψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.36aiv 959 |
Inference from Theorem 19.36 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
∃x(φ → ψ)
⇒ ⊢
(∀xφ → ψ) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.12vv 960 |
Special case of 19.12 729 where its converse holds.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∀y(φ →
ψ) ↔ ∀y∃x(φ → ψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.37v 961 |
Special case of Theorem 19.37 of [Margaris]
p. 90.
|
| ⊢
(∃x(φ → ψ) ↔ (φ → ∃xψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.37aiv 962 |
Inference from Theorem 19.37 of [Margaris] p.
90.
|
| ⊢
∃x(φ → ψ)
⇒ ⊢ (φ → ∃xψ) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.41v 963 |
Special case of Theorem 19.41 of [Margaris]
p. 90.
|
| ⊢
(∃x(φ ∧ ψ) ↔ (∃xφ ∧
ψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.41vv 964 |
Theorem 19.41 of [Margaris] p. 90 with 2
quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y(φ ∧
ψ) ↔ (∃x∃yφ ∧ ψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.41vvv 965 |
Theorem 19.41 of [Margaris] p. 90 with 3
quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y∃z(φ ∧ ψ) ↔ (∃x∃y∃zφ ∧ ψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.42v 966 |
Special case of Theorem 19.42 of [Margaris]
p. 90.
|
| ⊢
(∃x(φ ∧ ψ) ↔ (φ ∧ ∃xψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | exdistr 967 |
Distribution of existential quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y(φ ∧
ψ) ↔ ∃x(φ ∧
∃yψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 19.42vv 968 |
Theorem 19.42 of [Margaris] p. 90 with 2
quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y(φ ∧
ψ) ↔ (φ ∧ ∃x∃yψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | exdistr2 969 |
Distribution of existential quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y∃z(φ ∧ ψ) ↔ ∃x(φ ∧
∃y∃zψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | 3exdistr 970 |
Distribution of existential quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y∃z(φ ∧ ψ ∧ χ) ↔ ∃x(φ ∧
∃y(ψ ∧ ∃zχ))) |
| |
| Theorem | 4exdistr 971 |
Distribution of existential quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y∃z∃w((φ ∧
ψ) ∧ (χ ∧ θ)) ↔ ∃x(φ ∧
∃y(ψ ∧ ∃z(χ ∧
∃wθ)))) |
| |
| Theorem | cbvalv 972 |
Rule used to change bound variables with implicit substitution.
|
| ⊢
(x = y → (φ
↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢
(∀xφ ↔ ∀yψ) |
| |
| Theorem | cbvexv 973 |
Rule used to change bound variables with implicit substitution.
|
| ⊢
(x = y → (φ
↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢ (∃xφ ↔
∃yψ) |
| |
| Theorem | cbval2 974 |
Rule used to change bound variables with implicit substitution.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀zφ)
& ⊢ (φ → ∀wφ)
& ⊢ (ψ → ∀xψ)
& ⊢ (ψ → ∀yψ)
& ⊢ ((x = z ∧
y = w)
→ (φ ↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢
(∀x∀yφ ↔
∀z∀wψ) |
| |
| Theorem | cbvex2 975 |
Rule used to change bound variables with implicit substitution.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀zφ)
& ⊢ (φ → ∀wφ)
& ⊢ (ψ → ∀xψ)
& ⊢ (ψ → ∀yψ)
& ⊢ ((x = z ∧
y = w)
→ (φ ↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢ (∃x∃yφ ↔ ∃z∃wψ) |
| |
| Theorem | cbvex2v 976 |
Rule used to change bound variables with implicit substitution.
|
| ⊢
((x = z ∧ y =
w) → (φ ↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢ (∃x∃yφ ↔ ∃z∃wψ) |
| |
| Theorem | cbvald 977 |
Deduction used to change bound variables with implicit substitution,
particularly useful in conjunction with ddelim 1000.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀yφ)
& ⊢ (φ → (ψ → ∀yψ))
& ⊢ (φ → (x = y →
(ψ ↔ χ)))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∀xψ ↔
∀yχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | cbvexd 978 |
Deduction used to change bound variables with implicit substitution,
particularly useful in conjunction with ddelim 1000.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀yφ)
& ⊢ (φ → (ψ → ∀yψ))
& ⊢ (φ → (x = y →
(ψ ↔ χ)))
⇒ ⊢ (φ → (∃xψ ↔
∃yχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | cbvex4v 979 |
Rule used to change bound variables with implicit substitution.
|
| ⊢
((x = v ∧ y =
u) → (φ ↔ ψ))
& ⊢ ((z = f ∧
w = g)
→ (ψ ↔ χ))
⇒ ⊢ (∃x∃y∃z∃wφ ↔ ∃v∃u∃f∃gχ) |
| |
| Theorem | eeanv 980 |
Rearrange existential quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y(φ ∧
ψ) ↔ (∃xφ ∧
∃yψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | eeeanv 981 |
Rearrange existential quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y∃z(φ ∧ ψ ∧ χ) ↔ (∃xφ ∧
∃yψ ∧ ∃zχ)) |
| |
| Theorem | ee4anv 982 |
Rearrange existential quantifiers.
|
| ⊢
(∃x∃y∃z∃w(φ ∧ ψ) ↔ (∃x∃yφ ∧ ∃z∃wψ)) |
| |
| Theorem | nexdv 983 |
Deduction for generalization rule for negated wff.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ¬ ψ)
⇒ ⊢ (φ → ¬ ∃xψ) |
| |
| Theorem | chv 984 |
Implicit substitution of y for x into a theorem.
|
| ⊢
(x = y → (φ
↔ ψ))
& ⊢ φ
⇒ ⊢ ψ |
| |
| Theorem | cleljust 985 |
When the class variables in definition df-clel 1099 are replaced with set
variables, this theorem of predicate calculus is the result. This
theorem provides part of the justification for the consistency of that
definition, which "overloads" the set variables in wel 803
with the class
variables in wcel 1092.
|
| ⊢
(x ∈ y ↔ ∃z(z = x ∧ z
∈ y)) |
| |
| Theorem | hbs1 986 |
x is not free in [y / x]φ when x
and y are
distinct.
|
| ⊢
([y / x]φ →
∀x[y / x]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | hbsb 987 |
If z is not free in φ, it is not free in [y / x]φ
when y and z are distinct.
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀zφ)
⇒ ⊢ ([y / x]φ → ∀z[y / x]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sb5 988 |
Equivalence for substitution. Similar to Theorem 6.1 of [Quine]
p. 40.
|
| ⊢
([y / x]φ ↔
∃x(x = y ∧
φ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sb6 989 |
Equivalence for substitution. Compare Theorem 6.2 of [Quine] p. 40.
|
| ⊢
([y / x]φ ↔
∀x(x = y →
φ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sb6a 990 |
Equivalence for substitution. Compare Theorem 6.2 of [Quine] p. 40.
|
| ⊢
([y / x]φ ↔
∀x(x = y →
[x / y]φ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sb7 991 |
An alternate definition of proper substitution df-sb 853. By
introducing a dummy variable z in
the definiens, we are able to
eliminate any distinct variable restrictions among the variables
x,
y, and φ of the definiendum. Compare Definition
2.1'' of
[Quine] p. 17, which is obtained from
this theorem by applying
df-clab 1093.
|
| ⊢
([y / x]φ ↔
∃z(z = y ∧
∃x(x = z ∧
φ))) |
| |
| Theorem | sbcom2 992 |
Commutativity law for substitution. Used in proof of Theorem 9.7 of
[Megill] p. 449 (p. 16 of the preprint).
|
| ⊢
([w / z][y / x]φ ↔
[y / x][w / z]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sbid2v 993 |
An identity law for substitution. Used in proof of Theorem 9.7 of
[Megill] p. 449 (p. 16 of the preprint).
|
| ⊢
([y / x][x / y]φ ↔
φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sbelx 994 |
Elimination of substitution.
|
| ⊢
(φ ↔ ∃x(x = y ∧ [x /
y]φ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sbel2x 995 |
Elimination of double substitution.
|
| ⊢
(φ ↔ ∃x∃y((x = z ∧ y =
w) ∧ [y / w][x / z]φ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sbal1 996 |
A theorem used in elimination of disjoint variable restriction on x
and y by replacing it with a
distinctor ¬ ∀xx = z.
|
| ⊢
(¬ ∀x x = z →
([z / y]∀xφ ↔
∀x[z / y]φ)) |
| |
| Theorem | sbal 997 |
Move universal quantifier in and out of substitution.
|
| ⊢
([z / y]∀xφ ↔
∀x[z / y]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sbex 998 |
Move existential quantifier in and out of substitution.
|
| ⊢
([z / y]∃xφ ↔ ∃x[z / y]φ) |
| |
| Theorem | sbalv 999 |
Quantify with new variable inside substitution.
|
| ⊢
([y / x]φ ↔
ψ)
⇒ ⊢ ([y / x]∀zφ ↔
∀zψ) |
| |
| Theorem | ddelim 1000 |
This theorem can be used to eliminate a distinct variable restriction on
x and z and replace it with the "distinctor"
¬ ∀xx = y
as an antecedent. φ is
considered to contain z, and ψ to
have z replaced with y, and we don't require that x and
y be distinct (if they aren't, the
distinctor will become false and
"protect" the consequent).
|
| ⊢
(φ → ∀xφ)
& ⊢ (z = y →
(φ ↔ ψ))
⇒ ⊢ (¬
∀x x = y →
(ψ → ∀xψ)) |