Metamath Proof Explorer |
< Previous
Next >
Nearby theorems |
||
Mirrors > Home > MPE Home > Th. List > 1kp2ke3k | Structured version Visualization version Unicode version |
Description: Example for df-dec 11494, 1000 + 2000 = 3000.
This proof disproves (by counterexample) the assertion of Hao Wang, who stated, "There is a theorem in the primitive notation of set theory that corresponds to the arithmetic theorem 1000 + 2000 = 3000. The formula would be forbiddingly long... even if (one) knows the definitions and is asked to simplify the long formula according to them, chances are he will make errors and arrive at some incorrect result." (Hao Wang, "Theory and practice in mathematics" , In Thomas Tymoczko, editor, New Directions in the Philosophy of Mathematics, pp 129-152, Birkauser Boston, Inc., Boston, 1986. (QA8.6.N48). The quote itself is on page 140.) This is noted in Metamath: A Computer Language for Pure Mathematics by Norman Megill (2007) section 1.1.3. Megill then states, "A number of writers have conveyed the impression that the kind of absolute rigor provided by Metamath is an impossible dream, suggesting that a complete, formal verification of a typical theorem would take millions of steps in untold volumes of books... These writers assume, however, that in order to achieve the kind of complete formal verification they desire one must break down a proof into individual primitive steps that make direct reference to the axioms. This is not necessary. There is no reason not to make use of previously proved theorems rather than proving them over and over... A hierarchy of theorems and definitions permits an exponential growth in the formula sizes and primitive proof steps to be described with only a linear growth in the number of symbols used. Of course, this is how ordinary informal mathematics is normally done anyway, but with Metamath it can be done with absolute rigor and precision." The proof here starts with , commutes it, and repeatedly multiplies both sides by ten. This is certainly longer than traditional mathematical proofs, e.g., there are a number of steps explicitly shown here to show that we're allowed to do operations such as multiplication. However, while longer, the proof is clearly a manageable size - even though every step is rigorously derived all the way back to the primitive notions of set theory and logic. And while there's a risk of making errors, the many independent verifiers make it much less likely that an incorrect result will be accepted. This proof heavily relies on the decimal constructor df-dec 11494 developed by Mario Carneiro in 2015. The underlying Metamath language has an intentionally very small set of primitives; it doesn't even have a built-in construct for numbers. Instead, the digits are defined using these primitives, and the decimal constructor is used to make it easy to express larger numbers as combinations of digits. (Contributed by David A. Wheeler, 29-Jun-2016.) (Shortened by Mario Carneiro using the arithmetic algorithm in mmj2, 30-Jun-2016.) |
Ref | Expression |
---|---|
1kp2ke3k | ;;; ;;; ;;; |
Step | Hyp | Ref | Expression |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 1nn0 11308 | . . . 4 | |
2 | 0nn0 11307 | . . . 4 | |
3 | 1, 2 | deccl 11512 | . . 3 ; |
4 | 3, 2 | deccl 11512 | . 2 ;; |
5 | 2nn0 11309 | . . . 4 | |
6 | 5, 2 | deccl 11512 | . . 3 ; |
7 | 6, 2 | deccl 11512 | . 2 ;; |
8 | eqid 2622 | . 2 ;;; ;;; | |
9 | eqid 2622 | . 2 ;;; ;;; | |
10 | eqid 2622 | . . 3 ;; ;; | |
11 | eqid 2622 | . . 3 ;; ;; | |
12 | eqid 2622 | . . . 4 ; ; | |
13 | eqid 2622 | . . . 4 ; ; | |
14 | 1p2e3 11152 | . . . 4 | |
15 | 00id 10211 | . . . 4 | |
16 | 1, 2, 5, 2, 12, 13, 14, 15 | decadd 11570 | . . 3 ; ; ; |
17 | 3, 2, 6, 2, 10, 11, 16, 15 | decadd 11570 | . 2 ;; ;; ;; |
18 | 4, 2, 7, 2, 8, 9, 17, 15 | decadd 11570 | 1 ;;; ;;; ;;; |
Colors of variables: wff setvar class |
Syntax hints: wceq 1483 (class class class)co 6650 cc0 9936 c1 9937 caddc 9939 c2 11070 c3 11071 ;cdc 11493 |
This theorem was proved from axioms: ax-mp 5 ax-1 6 ax-2 7 ax-3 8 ax-gen 1722 ax-4 1737 ax-5 1839 ax-6 1888 ax-7 1935 ax-8 1992 ax-9 1999 ax-10 2019 ax-11 2034 ax-12 2047 ax-13 2246 ax-ext 2602 ax-sep 4781 ax-nul 4789 ax-pow 4843 ax-pr 4906 ax-un 6949 ax-resscn 9993 ax-1cn 9994 ax-icn 9995 ax-addcl 9996 ax-addrcl 9997 ax-mulcl 9998 ax-mulrcl 9999 ax-mulcom 10000 ax-addass 10001 ax-mulass 10002 ax-distr 10003 ax-i2m1 10004 ax-1ne0 10005 ax-1rid 10006 ax-rnegex 10007 ax-rrecex 10008 ax-cnre 10009 ax-pre-lttri 10010 ax-pre-lttrn 10011 ax-pre-ltadd 10012 |
This theorem depends on definitions: df-bi 197 df-or 385 df-an 386 df-3or 1038 df-3an 1039 df-tru 1486 df-ex 1705 df-nf 1710 df-sb 1881 df-eu 2474 df-mo 2475 df-clab 2609 df-cleq 2615 df-clel 2618 df-nfc 2753 df-ne 2795 df-nel 2898 df-ral 2917 df-rex 2918 df-reu 2919 df-rab 2921 df-v 3202 df-sbc 3436 df-csb 3534 df-dif 3577 df-un 3579 df-in 3581 df-ss 3588 df-pss 3590 df-nul 3916 df-if 4087 df-pw 4160 df-sn 4178 df-pr 4180 df-tp 4182 df-op 4184 df-uni 4437 df-iun 4522 df-br 4654 df-opab 4713 df-mpt 4730 df-tr 4753 df-id 5024 df-eprel 5029 df-po 5035 df-so 5036 df-fr 5073 df-we 5075 df-xp 5120 df-rel 5121 df-cnv 5122 df-co 5123 df-dm 5124 df-rn 5125 df-res 5126 df-ima 5127 df-pred 5680 df-ord 5726 df-on 5727 df-lim 5728 df-suc 5729 df-iota 5851 df-fun 5890 df-fn 5891 df-f 5892 df-f1 5893 df-fo 5894 df-f1o 5895 df-fv 5896 df-ov 6653 df-om 7066 df-wrecs 7407 df-recs 7468 df-rdg 7506 df-er 7742 df-en 7956 df-dom 7957 df-sdom 7958 df-pnf 10076 df-mnf 10077 df-ltxr 10079 df-nn 11021 df-2 11079 df-3 11080 df-4 11081 df-5 11082 df-6 11083 df-7 11084 df-8 11085 df-9 11086 df-n0 11293 df-dec 11494 |
This theorem is referenced by: (None) |
Copyright terms: Public domain | W3C validator |