| Metamath Proof Explorer | < Previous Next > | |
| Browser slow? Try the
Unicode version. |
| Color key: | (1-8787) |
(8788-10368) |
(10369-10781) |
| Type | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | ||
| Theorem | mo3 1401 |
Alternate definition of "at most one." Definition of [BellMachover]
p. 460, except that definition has the side condition that |
| Theorem | mo4f 1402 | "At most one" expressed using implicit substitution. |
| Theorem | mo4 1403 | "At most one" expressed using implicit substitution. |
| Theorem | mobid 1404 | Formula-building rule for "at most one" quantifier (deduction rule). |
| Theorem | mobii 1405 | Formula-building rule for "at most one" quantifier (inference rule). |
| Theorem | hbmo1 1406 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for "at most one." |
| Theorem | hbmo 1407 | Bound-variable hypothesis builder for "at most one." |
| Theorem | cbvmo 1408 | Rule used to change bound variables with implicit substitution. |
| Theorem | eu5 1409 | Uniqueness in terms of "at most one." |
| Theorem | eu4 1410 | Uniqueness using implicit substitution. |
| Theorem | eumo 1411 | Existential uniqueness implies "at most one." |
| Theorem | eumoi 1412 | "At most one" inferred from existential uniqueness. |
| Theorem | exmoeu 1413 | Existence in terms of "at most one" and uniqueness. |
| Theorem | exmoeu2 1414 | Existence implies "at most one" is equivalent to uniqueness. |
| Theorem | moabs 1415 | Absorption of existence condition by "at most one." |
| Theorem | exmo 1416 | Something exists or at most one exists. |
| Theorem | immo 1417 | "At most one" is preserved through implication (notice wff reversal). |
| Theorem | immoi 1418 | "At most one" is preserved through implication (notice wff reversal). |
| Theorem | moimv 1419 | Move antecedent outside of "at most one." |
| Theorem | euimmo 1420 | Uniqueness implies "at most one" through implication. |
| Theorem | euim 1421 | Add existential uniqueness quantifiers to an implication. Note the reversed implication in the antecedent. |
| Theorem | moan 1422 | "At most one" is still the case when a conjunct is added. |
| Theorem | moani 1423 | "At most one" is still true when a conjunct is added. |
| Theorem | moor 1424 | "At most one" is still the case when a disjunct is removed. |
| Theorem | mooran1 1425 | "At most one" imports disjunction to conjunction. |
| Theorem | mooran2 1426 | "At most one" exports disjunction to conjunction. |
| Theorem | moanim 1427 | Introduction of a conjunct into "at most one" quantifier. |
| Theorem | euan 1428 | Introduction of a conjunct into uniqueness quantifier. |
| Theorem | moanimv 1429 | Introduction of a conjunct into "at most one" quantifier. |
| Theorem | moaneu 1430 | Nested "at most one" and uniqueness quantifiers. |
| Theorem | moanmo 1431 | Nested "at most one" quantifiers. |
| Theorem | euanv 1432 | Introduction of a conjunct into uniqueness quantifier. |
| Theorem | mopick 1433 | "At most one" picks a variable value, eliminating an existential quantifier. |
| Theorem | eupick 1434 |
Existential uniqueness "picks" a variable value for which another wff
is
true. If there is only one thing |
| Theorem | eupickb 1435 | Existential uniqueness "pick" showing wff equivalence. |
| Theorem | mopick2 1436 | "At most one" can show the existence of a common value. In this case we can infer existence of conjunction from a conjunction of existence, and it is one way to achieve the converse of 19.40 1094. |
| Theorem | euor2 1437 | Introduce or eliminate a disjunct in a uniqueness quantifier. |
| Theorem | moexex 1438 | "At most one" double quantification. |
| Theorem | moexexv 1439 | "At most one" double quantification. |
| Theorem | 2moex 1440 | Double quantification with "at most one." |
| Theorem | 2euex 1441 | Double quantification with existential uniqueness. |
| Theorem | 2eumo 1442 | Double quantification with existential uniqueness and "at most one." |
| Theorem | 2eu2ex 1443 | Double existential uniqueness. |
| Theorem | 2moswap 1444 | A condition allowing swap of "at most one" and existential quantifiers. |
| Theorem | 2euswap 1445 | A condition allowing swap of uniqueness and existential quantifiers. |
| Theorem | 2exeu 1446 | Double existential uniqueness implies double uniqueness quantification. |
| Theorem | 2mo 1447 | Two equivalent expressions for double "at most one." |
| Theorem | 2mos 1448 | Double "exists at most one" with implicit substitution. |
| Theorem | 2eu1 1449 | Double existential uniqueness. This theorem shows a condition under which a "naive" definition matches the correct one. |
| Theorem | 2eu2 1450 | Double existential uniqueness. |
| Theorem | 2eu3 1451 | Double existential uniqueness. |
| Theorem | 2eu4 1452 |
This theorem provides us with a definition of double existential
uniqueness ("exactly one |
| Theorem | 2eu5 1453 |
An alternate definition of double existential uniqueness (see 2eu4 1452).
A mistake sometimes made in the literature is to use |
| Theorem | 2eu6 1454 | Two equivalent expressions for double existential uniqueness. |
| Theorem | 2eu7 1455 | Two equivalent expressions for double existential uniqueness. |
| Theorem | 2eu8 1456 |
Two equivalent expressions for double existential uniqueness.
Curiously, we can put |
| Theorem | exists1 1457 | Two ways to express "only one thing exists." The left-hand side requires only one variable to express this. Both sides are false in set theory; see theorem dtru 2772. |
| Theorem | exists2 1458 | A condition implying that at least two things exist. |
| ZF Set Theory - start with the Axiom of Extensionality | ||
| Introduce the Axiom of Extensionality | ||
| Axiom | ax-ext 1459 |
Axiom of Extensionality. An axiom of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. It
states that two sets are identical if they contain the same elements.
Axiom Ext of [BellMachover] p.
461.
Set theory can also be formulated with a single primitive
predicate
To use the above "equality-free" version of Extensionality with Metamath's logical axioms, we would rewrite ax-8 964 through ax-16 1210 with equality expanded according to the above definition. Some of those axioms could be proved from set theory and would be redundant. Not all of them are redundant, since our axioms of predicate calculus make essential use of equality for the proper substitution that is a primitive notion in traditional predicate calculus. A study of such an axiomatization would be an interesting project for someone exploring the foundations of logic. General remarks: Our set theory axioms are presented using defin |