Theorem dtru 4857

Description: At least two sets exist (or in terms of first-order logic, the universe of discourse has two or more objects). Note that we may not substitute the same variable for both 𝑥 and 𝑦 (as indicated by the distinct variable requirement), for otherwise we would contradict stdpc6 1957.

This theorem is proved directly from set theory axioms (no set theory definitions) and does not use ax-ext 2602 or ax-sep 4781. See dtruALT 4899 for a shorter proof using these axioms.

The proof makes use of dummy variables 𝑧 and 𝑤 which do not appear in the final theorem. They must be distinct from each other and from 𝑥 and 𝑦. In other words, if we were to substitute 𝑥 for 𝑧 throughout the proof, the proof would fail. (Contributed by NM, 7-Nov-2006.)

Assertion

Ref	Expression
dtru	⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦

Distinct variable group:   𝑥,𝑦

Proof of Theorem dtru

Dummy variables 𝑤 𝑧 are mutually distinct and distinct from all other variables.

Step	Hyp	Ref	Expression
1		el 4847	. . . 4 ⊢ ∃𝑤 𝑥 ∈ 𝑤
2		ax-nul 4789	. . . . 5 ⊢ ∃𝑧∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧
3		sp 2053	. . . . 5 ⊢ (∀𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧 → ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧)
4	2, 3	eximii 1764	. . . 4 ⊢ ∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧
5		eeanv 2182	. . . 4 ⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) ↔ (∃𝑤 𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧))
6	1, 4, 5	mpbir2an 955	. . 3 ⊢ ∃𝑤∃𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧)
7		ax9 2003	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (𝑤 = 𝑧 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧))
8	7	com12 32	. . . . 5 ⊢ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 → (𝑤 = 𝑧 → 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧))
9	8	con3dimp 457	. . . 4 ⊢ ((𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧)
10	9	2eximi 1763	. . 3 ⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑧(𝑥 ∈ 𝑤 ∧ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑧) → ∃𝑤∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧)
11		equequ2 1953	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (𝑤 = 𝑧 ↔ 𝑤 = 𝑦))
12	11	notbid 308	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 ↔ ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦))
13		ax7 1943	. . . . . . . 8 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑤 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑤 = 𝑦))
14	13	con3d 148	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑤 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
15	14	spimev 2259	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
16	12, 15	syl6bi 243	. . . . 5 ⊢ (𝑧 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
17		ax7 1943	. . . . . . . 8 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑧 = 𝑦))
18	17	con3d 148	. . . . . . 7 ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑧 → (¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦 → ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
19	18	spimev 2259	. . . . . 6 ⊢ (¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
20	19	a1d 25	. . . . 5 ⊢ (¬ 𝑧 = 𝑦 → (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦))
21	16, 20	pm2.61i 176	. . . 4 ⊢ (¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
22	21	exlimivv 1860	. . 3 ⊢ (∃𝑤∃𝑧 ¬ 𝑤 = 𝑧 → ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦)
23	6, 10, 22	mp2b 10	. 2 ⊢ ∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦
24		exnal 1754	. 2 ⊢ (∃𝑥 ¬ 𝑥 = 𝑦 ↔ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦)
25	23, 24	mpbi 220	1 ⊢ ¬ ∀𝑥 𝑥 = 𝑦

Syntax hints:  ¬ wn 3   → wi 4   ∧ wa 384  ∀wal 1481  ∃wex 1704

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-nul 4789  ax-pow 4843

This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 197  df-or 385  df-an 386  df-tru 1486  df-ex 1705  df-nf 1710

This theorem is referenced by:  axc16b  4858  eunex  4859  nfnid  4897  dtrucor  4900  dvdemo1  4902  brprcneu  6184  zfcndpow  9438