P. 107 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 10601-10700   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	bj-elssuniab 10601	Version of elssuni 3629 using a class abstraction and explicit substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Nov-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ ∪ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}))
Theorem	bj-sseq 10602	If two converse inclusions are characterized each by a formula, then equality is characterized by the conjunction of these formulas. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵))
6.2.4  Constructive Zermelo--Fraenkel set theory (CZF): Bounded formulas and classes This section develops constructive Zermelo--Fraenkel set theory (CZF) on top of intuitionistic logic. It is a constructive theory in the sense that its logic is intuitionistic and it is predicative. "Predicative" means that new sets can be constructed only from already constructed sets. In particular, the axiom of separation ax-sep 3896 is not predicative (because we cannot allow all formulas to define a subset) and is replaced in CZF by bounded separation ax-bdsep 10675. Because this axiom is weaker than full separation, the axiom of replacement or collection ax-coll 3893 of ZF and IZF has to be strengthened in CZF to the axiom of strong collection ax-strcoll 10777 (which is a theorem of IZF), and the axiom of infinity needs a more precise version, the von Neumann axiom of infinity ax-infvn 10736. Similarly, the axiom of powerset ax-pow 3948 is not predicative (checking whether a set is included in another requires to universally quantifier over that "not yet constructed" set) and is replaced in CZF by the axiom of fullness or the axiom of subset collection ax-sscoll 10782. In an intuitionistic context, the axiom of regularity is stated in IZF as well as in CZF as the axiom of set induction ax-setind 4280. It is sometimes interesting to study the weakening of CZF where that axiom is replaced by bounded set induction ax-bdsetind 10763. For more details on CZF, a useful set of notes is Peter Aczel and Michael Rathjen, CST Book draft. (available at http://www1.maths.leeds.ac.uk/~rathjen/book.pdf) and an interesting article is Michael Shulman, Comparing material and structural set theories, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, Volume 170, Issue 4 (Apr. 2019), 465--504. (available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.05204) I also thank Michael Rathjen and Michael Shulman for useful hints in the formulation of some results.
6.2.4.1  Bounded formulas The present definition of bounded formulas emerged from a discussion on GitHub between Jim Kingdon, Mario Carneiro and I, started 23-Sept-2019 (see https://github.com/metamath/set.mm/issues/1173 and links therein). In order to state certain axiom schemes of Constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel (CZF) set theory, like the axiom scheme of bounded (or restricted, or Δ0) separation, it is necessary to distinguish certain formulas, called bounded (or restricted, or Δ0) formulas. The necessity of considering bounded formulas also arises in several theories of bounded arithmetic, both classical or intuitonistic, for instance to state the axiom scheme of Δ0-induction. To formalize this in Metamath, there are several choices to make. A first choice is to either create a new type for bounded formulas, or to create a predicate on formulas that indicates whether they are bounded. In the first case, one creates a new type "wff0" with a new set of metavariables (ph0 ...) and an axiom "$a wff ph0 " ensuring that bounded formulas are formulas, so that one can reuse existing theorems, and then axioms take the form "$a wff0 ( ph0 -> ps0 )", etc. In the second case, one introduces a predicate "BOUNDED " with the intended meaning that "BOUNDED 𝜑 " is a formula meaning that 𝜑 is a bounded formula. We choose the second option, since the first would complicate the grammar, risking to make it ambiguous. (TODO: elaborate.) A second choice is to view "bounded" either as a syntactic or a semantic property. For instance, ∀𝑥⊤ is not syntactically bounded since it has an unbounded universal quantifier, but it is semantically bounded since it is equivalent to ⊤ which is bounded. We choose the second option, so that formulas using defined symbols can be proved bounded. A third choice is in the form of the axioms, either in closed form or in inference form. One cannot state all the axioms in closed form, especially ax-bd0 10604. Indeed, if we posited it in closed form, then we could prove for instance ⊢ (𝜑 → BOUNDED 𝜑) and ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → BOUNDED 𝜑) which is problematic (with the law of excluded middle, this would entail that all formulas are bounded, but even without it, too many formulas could be proved bounded...). (TODO: elaborate.) Having ax-bd0 10604 in inference form ensures that a formula can be proved bounded only if it is equivalent *for all values of the free variables* to a syntactically bounded one. The other axioms (ax-bdim 10605 through ax-bdsb 10613) can be written either in closed or inference form. The fact that ax-bd0 10604 is an inference is enough to ensure that the closed forms cannot be "exploited" to prove that some unbounded formulas are bounded. (TODO: check.) However, we state all the axioms in inference form to make it clear that we do not exploit any over-permissiveness. Finally, note that our logic has no terms, only variables. Therefore, we cannot prove for instance that 𝑥 ∈ ω is a bounded formula. However, since ω can be defined as "the 𝑦 such that PHI" a proof using the fact that 𝑥 ∈ ω is bounded can be converted to a proof in iset.mm by replacing ω with 𝑦 everywhere and prepending the antecedent PHI, since 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 is bounded by ax-bdel 10612. For a similar method, see bj-omtrans 10751. Note that one cannot add an axiom ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 since by bdph 10641 it would imply that every formula is bounded.
Syntax	wbd 10603	Syntax for the predicate BOUNDED.
wff BOUNDED 𝜑
Axiom	ax-bd0 10604	If two formulas are equivalent, then boundedness of one implies boundedness of the other. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (BOUNDED 𝜑 → BOUNDED 𝜓)
Axiom	ax-bdim 10605	An implication between two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 → 𝜓)
Axiom	ax-bdan 10606	The conjunction of two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Axiom	ax-bdor 10607	The disjunction of two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)
Axiom	ax-bdn 10608	The negation of a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ¬ 𝜑
Axiom	ax-bdal 10609*	A bounded universal quantification of a bounded formula is bounded. Note the DV condition on 𝑥, 𝑦. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑
Axiom	ax-bdex 10610*	A bounded existential quantification of a bounded formula is bounded. Note the DV condition on 𝑥, 𝑦. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑
Axiom	ax-bdeq 10611	An atomic formula is bounded (equality predicate). (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 = 𝑦
Axiom	ax-bdel 10612	An atomic formula is bounded (membership predicate). (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦
Axiom	ax-bdsb 10613	A formula resulting from proper substitution in a bounded formula is bounded. This probably cannot be proved from the other axioms, since neither the definiens in df-sb 1686, nor probably any other equivalent formula, is syntactically bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	bdeq 10614	Equality property for the predicate BOUNDED. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (BOUNDED 𝜑 ↔ BOUNDED 𝜓)
Theorem	bd0 10615	A formula equivalent to a bounded one is bounded. See also bd0r 10616. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓
Theorem	bd0r 10616	A formula equivalent to a bounded one is bounded. Stated with a commuted (compared with bd0 10615) biconditional in the hypothesis, to work better with definitions (𝜓 is the definiendum that one wants to prove bounded). (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓
Theorem	bdbi 10617	A biconditional between two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bdstab 10618	Stability of a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED STAB 𝜑
Theorem	bddc 10619	Decidability of a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED DECID 𝜑
Theorem	bd3or 10620	A disjunction of three bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)
Theorem	bd3an 10621	A conjunction of three bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)
Theorem	bdth 10622	A truth (a (closed) theorem) is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑
Theorem	bdtru 10623	The truth value ⊤ is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ⊤
Theorem	bdfal 10624	The truth value ⊥ is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ⊥
Theorem	bdnth 10625	A falsity is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ ¬ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑
Theorem	bdnthALT 10626	Alternate proof of bdnth 10625 not using bdfal 10624. Then, bdfal 10624 can be proved from this theorem, using fal 1291. The total number of proof steps would be 17 (for bdnthALT 10626) + 3 = 20, which is more than 8 (for bdfal 10624) + 9 (for bdnth 10625) = 17. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑
Theorem	bdxor 10627	The exclusive disjunction of two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-bdcel 10628*	Boundedness of a membership formula. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑦 = 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴 ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	bdab 10629	Membership in a class defined by class abstraction using a bounded formula, is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bdcdeq 10630	Conditional equality of a bounded formula is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
6.2.4.2  Bounded classes In line with our definitions of classes as extensions of predicates, it is useful to define a predicate for bounded classes, which is done in df-bdc 10632. Note that this notion is only a technical device which can be used to shorten proofs of (semantic) boundedness of formulas. As will be clear by the end of this subsection (see for instance bdop 10666), one can prove the boundedness of any concrete term using only setvars and bounded formulas, for instance, ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ BOUNDED ⟨{𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}, ({𝑦, suc 𝑧} × ⟨𝑡, ∅⟩)⟩. The proofs are long since one has to prove boundedness at each step of the construction, without being able to prove general theorems like ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ BOUNDED {𝐴}.
Syntax	wbdc 10631	Syntax for the predicate BOUNDED.
wff BOUNDED 𝐴
Definition	df-bdc 10632*	Define a bounded class as one such that membership in this class is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (BOUNDED 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)
Theorem	bdceq 10633	Equality property for the predicate BOUNDED. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ (BOUNDED 𝐴 ↔ BOUNDED 𝐵)
Theorem	bdceqi 10634	A class equal to a bounded one is bounded. Note the use of ax-ext 2063. See also bdceqir 10635. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵
Theorem	bdceqir 10635	A class equal to a bounded one is bounded. Stated with a commuted (compared with bdceqi 10634) equality in the hypothesis, to work better with definitions (𝐵 is the definiendum that one wants to prove bounded; see comment of bd0r 10616). (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵
Theorem	bdel 10636*	The belonging of a setvar in a bounded class is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (BOUNDED 𝐴 → BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)
Theorem	bdeli 10637*	Inference associated with bdel 10636. Its converse is bdelir 10638. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴
Theorem	bdelir 10638*	Inference associated with df-bdc 10632. Its converse is bdeli 10637. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴
Theorem	bdcv 10639	A setvar is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥
Theorem	bdcab 10640	A class defined by class abstraction using a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bdph 10641	A formula which defines (by class abstraction) a bounded class is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑
Theorem	bds 10642*	Boundedness of a formula resulting from implicit substitution in a bounded formula. Note that the proof does not use ax-bdsb 10613; therefore, using implicit instead of explicit substitution when boundedness is important, one might avoid using ax-bdsb 10613. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓
Theorem	bdcrab 10643*	A class defined by restricted abstraction from a bounded class and a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bdne 10644	Inequality of two setvars is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦
Theorem	bdnel 10645*	Non-membership of a setvar in a bounded formula is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴
Theorem	bdreu 10646*	Boundedness of existential uniqueness. Remark regarding restricted quantifiers: the formula ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴𝜑 need not be bounded even if 𝐴 and 𝜑 are. Indeed, V is bounded by bdcvv 10648, and ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ V𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜑) (in minimal propositional calculus), so by bd0 10615, if ∀𝑥 ∈ V𝜑 were bounded when 𝜑 is bounded, then ∀𝑥𝜑 would be bounded as well when 𝜑 is bounded, which is not the case. The same remark holds with ∃, ∃!, ∃*. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑
Theorem	bdrmo 10647*	Boundedness of existential at-most-one. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑
Theorem	bdcvv 10648	The universal class is bounded. The formulation may sound strange, but recall that here, "bounded" means "Δ0". (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED V
Theorem	bdsbc 10649	A formula resulting from proper substitution of a setvar for a setvar in a bounded formula is bounded. See also bdsbcALT 10650. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	bdsbcALT 10650	Alternate proof of bdsbc 10649. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	bdccsb 10651	A class resulting from proper substitution of a setvar for a setvar in a bounded class is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ⦋𝑦 / 𝑥⦌𝐴
Theorem	bdcdif 10652	The difference of two bounded classes is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵)
Theorem	bdcun 10653	The union of two bounded classes is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵)
Theorem	bdcin 10654	The intersection of two bounded classes is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵)
Theorem	bdss 10655	The inclusion of a setvar in a bounded class is a bounded formula. Note: apparently, we cannot prove from the present axioms that equality of two bounded classes is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴
Theorem	bdcnul 10656	The empty class is bounded. See also bdcnulALT 10657. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∅
Theorem	bdcnulALT 10657	Alternate proof of bdcnul 10656. Similarly, for the next few theorems proving boundedness of a class, one can either use their definition followed by bdceqir 10635, or use the corresponding characterizations of its elements followed by bdelir 10638. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∅
Theorem	bdeq0 10658	Boundedness of the formula expressing that a setvar is equal to the empty class. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 = ∅
Theorem	bj-bd0el 10659	Boundedness of the formula "the empty set belongs to the setvar 𝑥". (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∅ ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	bdcpw 10660	The power class of a bounded class is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝒫 𝐴
Theorem	bdcsn 10661	The singleton of a setvar is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥}
Theorem	bdcpr 10662	The pair of two setvars is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥, 𝑦}
Theorem	bdctp 10663	The unordered triple of three setvars is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧}
Theorem	bdsnss 10664*	Inclusion of a singleton of a setvar in a bounded class is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥} ⊆ 𝐴
Theorem	bdvsn 10665*	Equality of a setvar with a singleton of a setvar is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 = {𝑦}
Theorem	bdop 10666	The ordered pair of two setvars is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩
Theorem	bdcuni 10667	The union of a setvar is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∪ 𝑥
Theorem	bdcint 10668	The intersection of a setvar is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∩ 𝑥
Theorem	bdciun 10669*	The indexed union of a bounded class with a setvar indexing set is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝐴
Theorem	bdciin 10670*	The indexed intersection of a bounded class with a setvar indexing set is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∩ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝐴
Theorem	bdcsuc 10671	The successor of a setvar is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED suc 𝑥
Theorem	bdeqsuc 10672*	Boundedness of the formula expressing that a setvar is equal to the successor of another. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 = suc 𝑦
Theorem	bj-bdsucel 10673	Boundedness of the formula "the successor of the setvar 𝑥 belongs to the setvar 𝑦". (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦
Theorem	bdcriota 10674*	A class given by a restricted definition binder is bounded, under the given hypotheses. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑)
6.2.5  CZF: Bounded separation In this section, we state the axiom scheme of bounded separation, which is part of CZF set theory.
Axiom	ax-bdsep 10675*	Axiom scheme of bounded (or restricted, or Δ0) separation. It is stated with all possible disjoint variable conditions, to show that this weak form is sufficient. For the full axiom of separation, see ax-sep 3896. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑎∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdsep1 10676*	Version of ax-bdsep 10675 without initial universal quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdsep2 10677*	Version of ax-bdsep 10675 with one DV condition removed and without initial universal quantifier. Use bdsep1 10676 when sufficient. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdsepnft 10678*	Closed form of bdsepnf 10679. Version of ax-bdsep 10675 with one DV condition removed, the other DV condition replaced by a non-freeness antecedent, and without initial universal quantifier. Use bdsep1 10676 when sufficient. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑏𝜑 → ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	bdsepnf 10679*	Version of ax-bdsep 10675 with one DV condition removed, the other DV condition replaced by a non-freeness hypothesis, and without initial universal quantifier. See also bdsepnfALT 10680. Use bdsep1 10676 when sufficient. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdsepnfALT 10680*	Alternate proof of bdsepnf 10679, not using bdsepnft 10678. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdzfauscl 10681*	Closed form of the version of zfauscl 3898 for bounded formulas using bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	bdbm1.3ii 10682*	Bounded version of bm1.3ii 3899. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(𝜑 → 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥)    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ↔ 𝜑)
Theorem	bj-axemptylem 10683*	Lemma for bj-axempty 10684 and bj-axempty2 10685. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Oct-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) Use ax-nul 3904 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦(𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 → ⊥)
Theorem	bj-axempty 10684*	Axiom of the empty set from bounded separation. It is provable from bounded separation since the intuitionistic FOL used in iset.mm assumes a non-empty universe. See axnul 3903. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Oct-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) Use ax-nul 3904 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 ∈ 𝑥 ⊥
Theorem	bj-axempty2 10685*	Axiom of the empty set from bounded separation, alternate version to bj-axempty 10684. (Contributed by BJ, 27-Oct-2020.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) Use ax-nul 3904 instead. (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 ¬ 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	bj-nalset 10686*	nalset 3908 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥∀𝑦 𝑦 ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	bj-vprc 10687	vprc 3909 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ V ∈ V
Theorem	bj-nvel 10688	nvel 3910 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ V ∈ 𝐴
Theorem	bj-vnex 10689	vnex 3911 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ ∃𝑥 𝑥 = V
Theorem	bdinex1 10690	Bounded version of inex1 3912. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V
Theorem	bdinex2 10691	Bounded version of inex2 3913. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐴) ∈ V
Theorem	bdinex1g 10692	Bounded version of inex1g 3914. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V)
Theorem	bdssex 10693	Bounded version of ssex 3915. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	bdssexi 10694	Bounded version of ssexi 3916. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ 𝐵 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ 𝐴 ∈ V
Theorem	bdssexg 10695	Bounded version of ssexg 3917. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ ((𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶) → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	bdssexd 10696	Bounded version of ssexd 3918. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 ∈ 𝐶)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ∈ V)
Theorem	bdrabexg 10697*	Bounded version of rabexg 3921. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑} ∈ V)
Theorem	bj-inex 10698	The intersection of two sets is a set, from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ ((𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 ∧ 𝐵 ∈ 𝑊) → (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵) ∈ V)
Theorem	bj-intexr 10699	intexr 3925 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∩ 𝐴 ∈ V → 𝐴 ≠ ∅)
Theorem	bj-intnexr 10700	intnexr 3926 from bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 18-Nov-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.)
⊢ (∩ 𝐴 = V → ¬ ∩ 𝐴 ∈ V)