classes1.miz
begin
reserve W,X,Y,Z for
set,
f,g for
Function,
a,x,y,z for
set;
definition
let B be
set;
::
CLASSES1:def1
attr B is
subset-closed means
:
Def1: for X, Y holds X
in B & Y
c= X implies Y
in B;
end
definition
let B be
set;
::
CLASSES1:def2
attr B is
Tarski means B is
subset-closed & (for X holds X
in B implies (
bool X)
in B) & for X holds X
c= B implies (X,B)
are_equipotent or X
in B;
end
definition
let A,B be
set;
::
CLASSES1:def3
pred B
is_Tarski-Class_of A means A
in B & B is
Tarski;
end
definition
let A be
set;
::
CLASSES1:def4
func
Tarski-Class A ->
set means
:
Def4: it
is_Tarski-Class_of A & for D be
set st D
is_Tarski-Class_of A holds it
c= D;
existence
proof
consider Big be
set such that
A1: A
in Big and
A2: for X, Y holds X
in Big & Y
c= X implies Y
in Big and
A3: (for X holds X
in Big implies (
bool X)
in Big) & for X holds X
c= Big implies (X,Big)
are_equipotent or X
in Big by
ZFMISC_1: 112;
A4: Big is
Tarski by
A3,
A2,
Def1;
defpred
P[
set] means $1
is_Tarski-Class_of A;
consider Classes be
set such that
A5: X
in Classes iff X
in (
bool Big) &
P[X] from
XFAMILY:sch 1;
set IT = (
meet Classes);
A6: Big
in (
bool Big) & Big
is_Tarski-Class_of A by
A1,
A4,
ZFMISC_1:def 1;
then
A7: Big
in Classes by
A5;
A8: Classes
<>
{} by
A5,
A6;
A9:
now
let X;
assume X
in Classes;
then X
is_Tarski-Class_of A by
A5;
hence A
in X;
end;
then
A10: A
in IT by
A8,
SETFAM_1:def 1;
take IT;
thus A
in IT by
A8,
A9,
SETFAM_1:def 1;
thus
A11: X
in IT & Y
c= X implies Y
in IT
proof
assume that
A12: X
in IT and
A13: Y
c= X;
now
let Z;
assume
A14: Z
in Classes;
then Z
is_Tarski-Class_of A by
A5;
then Z is
Tarski;
then
A15: Z is
subset-closed;
X
in Z by
A12,
A14,
SETFAM_1:def 1;
hence Y
in Z by
A13,
A15;
end;
hence thesis by
A8,
SETFAM_1:def 1;
end;
thus
A16: X
in IT implies (
bool X)
in IT
proof
assume
A17: X
in IT;
now
let Z;
assume
A18: Z
in Classes;
then Z
is_Tarski-Class_of A by
A5;
then
A19: Z is
Tarski;
X
in Z by
A17,
A18,
SETFAM_1:def 1;
hence (
bool X)
in Z by
A19;
end;
hence thesis by
A8,
SETFAM_1:def 1;
end;
thus
A20: X
c= IT implies (X,IT)
are_equipotent or X
in IT
proof
assume that
A21: X
c= IT and
A22: not (X,IT)
are_equipotent ;
now
let Z;
assume
A23: Z
in Classes;
then Z
is_Tarski-Class_of A by
A5;
then
A24: Z is
Tarski;
A25: IT
c= Z by
A23,
SETFAM_1: 3;
then X
c= Z by
A21;
then (X,Z)
are_equipotent or X
in Z by
A24;
hence X
in Z by
A21,
A22,
A25,
CARD_1: 24;
end;
hence thesis by
A8,
SETFAM_1:def 1;
end;
let D be
set;
assume
A26: D
is_Tarski-Class_of A;
then
A27: A
in D;
A28: D is
Tarski by
A26;
then
A29: D is
subset-closed;
A30: (IT
/\ D)
is_Tarski-Class_of A
proof
thus A
in (IT
/\ D) by
A10,
A27,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
thus X
in (IT
/\ D) & Y
c= X implies Y
in (IT
/\ D)
proof
assume that
A31: X
in (IT
/\ D) and
A32: Y
c= X;
A33: X
in IT by
A31,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
A34: X
in D by
A31,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
A35: Y
in IT by
A11,
A32,
A33;
Y
in D by
A29,
A32,
A34;
hence thesis by
A35,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
end;
thus X
in (IT
/\ D) implies (
bool X)
in (IT
/\ D)
proof
assume
A36: X
in (IT
/\ D);
then
A37: X
in IT by
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
A38: X
in D by
A36,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
A39: (
bool X)
in IT by
A16,
A37;
(
bool X)
in D by
A28,
A38;
hence thesis by
A39,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
end;
let X such that
A40: X
c= (IT
/\ D) and
A41: not (X,(IT
/\ D))
are_equipotent ;
A42: (IT
/\ D)
c= IT by
XBOOLE_1: 17;
A43: (IT
/\ D)
c= D by
XBOOLE_1: 17;
A44: not (X,IT)
are_equipotent by
A40,
A41,
A42,
CARD_1: 24;
A45: X
c= D & not (X,D)
are_equipotent by
A40,
A41,
A43,
CARD_1: 24;
A46: X
in IT by
A20,
A40,
A42,
A44,
XBOOLE_1: 1;
X
in D by
A28,
A45;
hence thesis by
A46,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
end;
(IT
/\ D)
c= Big
proof
let x be
object;
assume x
in (IT
/\ D);
then x
in IT by
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
hence thesis by
A7,
SETFAM_1:def 1;
end;
then
A47: IT
c= (IT
/\ D) by
SETFAM_1: 3,
A5,
A30;
(IT
/\ D)
c= D by
XBOOLE_1: 17;
hence thesis by
A47;
end;
uniqueness ;
end
registration
let A be
set;
cluster (
Tarski-Class A) -> non
empty;
coherence
proof
(
Tarski-Class A)
is_Tarski-Class_of A by
Def4;
hence thesis;
end;
end
theorem ::
CLASSES1:1
W is
Tarski iff W is
subset-closed & (for X st X
in W holds (
bool X)
in W) & for X st X
c= W & (
card X)
in (
card W) holds X
in W
proof
hereby
assume
A1: W is
Tarski;
hence W is
subset-closed & for X st X
in W holds (
bool X)
in W;
let X;
assume that
A2: X
c= W and
A3: (
card X)
in (
card W);
(
card X)
<> (
card W) by
A3;
then not (X,W)
are_equipotent by
CARD_1: 5;
hence X
in W by
A1,
A2;
end;
now
assume
A4: for X st X
c= W & (
card X)
in (
card W) holds X
in W;
let X;
assume X
c= W;
then (
card X)
c= (
card W) & not (
card X)
in (
card W) or X
in W by
A4,
CARD_1: 11;
hence (X,W)
are_equipotent or X
in W by
CARD_1: 3,
CARD_1: 5;
end;
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:2
Th2: X
in (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
(
Tarski-Class X)
is_Tarski-Class_of X by
Def4;
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:3
Th3: Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) & Z
c= Y implies Z
in (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
(
Tarski-Class X)
is_Tarski-Class_of X by
Def4;
then (
Tarski-Class X) is
Tarski;
then (
Tarski-Class X) is
subset-closed;
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:4
Th4: Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) implies (
bool Y)
in (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
(
Tarski-Class X)
is_Tarski-Class_of X by
Def4;
then (
Tarski-Class X) is
Tarski;
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:5
Th5: Y
c= (
Tarski-Class X) implies (Y,(
Tarski-Class X))
are_equipotent or Y
in (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
(
Tarski-Class X)
is_Tarski-Class_of X by
Def4;
then (
Tarski-Class X) is
Tarski;
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:6
Y
c= (
Tarski-Class X) & (
card Y)
in (
card (
Tarski-Class X)) implies Y
in (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
assume that
A1: Y
c= (
Tarski-Class X) and
A2: (
card Y)
in (
card (
Tarski-Class X));
(
card Y)
<> (
card (
Tarski-Class X)) by
A2;
hence thesis by
A1,
Th5,
CARD_1: 5;
end;
reserve u,v for
Element of (
Tarski-Class X),
A,B,C for
Ordinal,
L for
Sequence;
definition
let X, A;
::
CLASSES1:def5
func
Tarski-Class (X,A) ->
set means
:
Def5: ex L st it
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{X} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
= (({ u : ex v st v
in (L
. C) & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in (L
. C) })
\/ ((
bool (L
. C))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)))) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
= ((
union (
rng (L
| C)))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X));
correctness
proof
deffunc
C(
Ordinal,
set) = (({ u : ex v st v
in $2 & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in $2 })
\/ ((
bool $2)
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)));
deffunc
D(
Ordinal,
Sequence) = ((
union (
rng $2))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X));
(ex x be
object, L st x
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{X} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
=
C(C,.)) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
=
D(C,|)) & for x1,x2 be
set st (ex L st x1
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{X} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
=
C(C,.)) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
=
D(C,|)) & (ex L st x2
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{X} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
=
C(C,.)) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
=
D(C,|)) holds x1
= x2 from
ORDINAL2:sch 7;
hence thesis;
end;
end
Lm1:
now
let X;
deffunc
F(
Ordinal) = (
Tarski-Class (X,$1));
deffunc
C(
Ordinal,
set) = (({ u : ex v st v
in $2 & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in $2 })
\/ ((
bool $2)
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)));
deffunc
D(
Ordinal,
Sequence) = ((
union (
rng $2))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X));
A1: for A holds for x be
object holds x
=
F(A) iff ex L st x
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{X} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
=
C(C,.)) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
=
D(C,|) by
Def5;
thus
F(0)
=
{X} from
ORDINAL2:sch 8(
A1);
thus for A holds
F(succ)
=
C(A,F) from
ORDINAL2:sch 9(
A1);
thus A
<>
0 & A is
limit_ordinal & (
dom L)
= A & (for B st B
in A holds (L
. B)
= (
Tarski-Class (X,B))) implies (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= ((
union (
rng L))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))
proof
assume that
A2: A
<>
0 & A is
limit_ordinal and
A3: (
dom L)
= A and
A4: for B st B
in A holds (L
. B)
=
F(B);
thus
F(A)
=
D(A,L) from
ORDINAL2:sch 10(
A1,
A2,
A3,
A4);
end;
end;
definition
let X, A;
:: original:
Tarski-Class
redefine
func
Tarski-Class (X,A) ->
Subset of (
Tarski-Class X) ;
coherence
proof
defpred
P[
Ordinal] means (
Tarski-Class (X,$1)) is
Subset of (
Tarski-Class X);
{X}
c= (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
let x be
object;
assume x
in
{X};
then x
= X by
TARSKI:def 1;
hence thesis by
Th2;
end;
then
A1:
P[
0 ] by
Lm1;
A2:
P[B] implies
P[(
succ B)]
proof
assume (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) is
Subset of (
Tarski-Class X);
then
reconsider S = (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) as
Subset of (
Tarski-Class X);
set Y = (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ B)));
Y
c= (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
let x be
object;
assume x
in Y;
then x
in (({ u : ex v st v
in S & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in S })
\/ ((
bool S)
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))) by
Lm1;
then
A3: x
in ({ u : ex v st v
in S & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in S }) or x
in ((
bool S)
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)) by
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
A4:
now
assume x
in { u : ex v st v
in S & u
c= v };
then ex u st x
= u & ex v st v
in S & u
c= v;
hence thesis;
end;
now
assume x
in { (
bool v) : v
in S };
then ex v st x
= (
bool v) & v
in S;
hence thesis by
Th4;
end;
hence thesis by
A3,
A4,
XBOOLE_0:def 3,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
end;
hence thesis;
end;
A5: for B st B
<>
0 & B is
limit_ordinal & for C st C
in B holds
P[C] holds
P[B]
proof
let B such that
A6: B
<>
0 & B is
limit_ordinal and for C st C
in B holds (
Tarski-Class (X,C)) is
Subset of (
Tarski-Class X);
deffunc
f(
Ordinal) = (
Tarski-Class (X,$1));
consider L such that
A7: (
dom L)
= B & for C st C
in B holds (L
. C)
=
f(C) from
ORDINAL2:sch 2;
(
Tarski-Class (X,B))
= ((
union (
rng L))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)) by
A6,
A7,
Lm1;
hence thesis by
XBOOLE_1: 17;
end;
for A holds
P[A] from
ORDINAL2:sch 1(
A1,
A2,
A5);
hence thesis;
end;
end
theorem ::
CLASSES1:7
(
Tarski-Class (X,
{} ))
=
{X} by
Lm1;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:8
(
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)))
= (({ u : ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) })
\/ ((
bool (
Tarski-Class (X,A)))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))) by
Lm1;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:9
Th9: A
<>
{} & A is
limit_ordinal implies (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= { u : ex B st B
in A & u
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) }
proof
assume
A1: A
<>
{} & A is
limit_ordinal;
deffunc
f(
Ordinal) = (
Tarski-Class (X,$1));
consider L such that
A2: (
dom L)
= A & for B st B
in A holds (L
. B)
=
f(B) from
ORDINAL2:sch 2;
A3: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= ((
union (
rng L))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)) by
A1,
A2,
Lm1;
thus (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
c= { u : ex B st B
in A & u
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) }
proof
let x be
object;
assume x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
then x
in (
union (
rng L)) by
A3,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
then
consider Y such that
A4: x
in Y and
A5: Y
in (
rng L) by
TARSKI:def 4;
consider y be
object such that
A6: y
in (
dom L) and
A7: Y
= (L
. y) by
A5,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
reconsider y as
Ordinal by
A6;
Y
= (
Tarski-Class (X,y)) by
A2,
A6,
A7;
hence thesis by
A2,
A4,
A6;
end;
let x be
object;
assume x
in { u : ex B st B
in A & u
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) };
then
consider u such that
A8: x
= u and
A9: ex B st B
in A & u
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B));
consider B such that
A10: B
in A and
A11: u
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A9;
(L
. B)
= (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A2,
A10;
then (
Tarski-Class (X,B))
in (
rng L) by
A2,
A10,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
then u
in (
union (
rng L)) by
A11,
TARSKI:def 4;
hence thesis by
A3,
A8,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:10
Th10: Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) iff Y
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) or ex Z st Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & (Y
c= Z or Y
= (
bool Z))
proof
set T1 = { u : ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v };
set T2 = { (
bool v) : v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) };
set T3 = ((
bool (
Tarski-Class (X,A)))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X));
A1: (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)))
= ((T1
\/ T2)
\/ T3) by
Lm1;
thus Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) implies Y
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) or ex Z st Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & (Y
c= Z or Y
= (
bool Z))
proof
assume Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)));
then
A2: Y
in (T1
\/ T2) or Y
in T3 by
A1,
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
A3:
now
assume Y
in T1;
then ex u st Y
= u & ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v;
hence ex Z st Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & (Y
c= Z or Y
= (
bool Z));
end;
now
assume Y
in T2;
then ex v st Y
= (
bool v) & v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
hence ex Z st Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & (Y
c= Z or Y
= (
bool Z));
end;
hence thesis by
A2,
A3,
XBOOLE_0:def 3,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
end;
assume
A4: Y
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) or ex Z st Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & (Y
c= Z or Y
= (
bool Z));
A5:
now
assume Y
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & Y
in (
Tarski-Class X);
then Y
in T3 by
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
hence thesis by
A1,
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
end;
now
given Z such that
A6: Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) and
A7: Y
c= Z or Y
= (
bool Z);
reconsider Z as
Element of (
Tarski-Class X) by
A6;
reconsider y = Y as
Element of (
Tarski-Class X) by
A6,
A7,
Th3,
Th4;
A8:
now
assume Y
c= Z;
then y
in T1 by
A6;
then Y
in (T1
\/ T2) by
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
hence thesis by
A1,
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
end;
now
assume Y
= (
bool Z);
then y
in T2 by
A6;
then Y
in (T1
\/ T2) by
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
hence thesis by
A1,
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
end;
hence thesis by
A7,
A8;
end;
hence thesis by
A4,
A5;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:11
Y
c= Z & Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) implies Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) by
Th10;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:12
Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) implies (
bool Y)
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) by
Th10;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:13
Th13: A
<>
{} & A is
limit_ordinal implies (x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) iff ex B st B
in A & x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)))
proof
assume
A1: A
<>
{} & A is
limit_ordinal;
then
A2: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= { u : ex B st B
in A & u
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) } by
Th9;
thus x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) implies ex B st B
in A & x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B))
proof
assume x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
then ex u st x
= u & ex B st B
in A & u
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A2;
hence thesis;
end;
given B such that
A3: B
in A and
A4: x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B));
reconsider u = x as
Element of (
Tarski-Class X) by
A4;
u
in { v : ex B st B
in A & v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) } by
A3,
A4;
hence thesis by
A1,
Th9;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:14
A
<>
{} & A is
limit_ordinal & Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & (Z
c= Y or Z
= (
bool Y)) implies Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
proof
assume that
A1: A
<>
{} and
A2: A is
limit_ordinal and
A3: Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
consider B such that
A4: B
in A and
A5: Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A1,
A2,
A3,
Th13;
A6: (
bool Y)
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ B))) by
A5,
Th10;
A7: Z
c= Y implies Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ B))) by
A5,
Th10;
A8: (
succ B)
in A by
A2,
A4,
ORDINAL1: 28;
assume Z
c= Y or Z
= (
bool Y);
hence thesis by
A2,
A6,
A7,
A8,
Th13;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:15
Th15: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)))
proof
let x be
object;
assume x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
then x
in { u : ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v };
then
A1: x
in ({ u : ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) }) by
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
(
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)))
= (({ u : ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) })
\/ ((
bool (
Tarski-Class (X,A)))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))) by
Lm1;
hence thesis by
A1,
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:16
Th16: A
c= B implies (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,B))
proof
defpred
OnP[
Ordinal] means A
c= $1 implies (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,$1));
A1: for B st for C st C
in B holds
OnP[C] holds
OnP[B]
proof
let B such that
A2: for C st C
in B holds
OnP[C] and
A3: A
c= B;
let x be
object;
assume
A4: x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
now
assume
A5: A
<> B;
then
A6: A
in B by
ORDINAL1: 11,
A3,
XBOOLE_0:def 8;
A7: B
<>
{} by
A3,
A5;
A8:
now
given C such that
A9: B
= (
succ C);
A
c= C & C
in B by
A6,
A9,
ORDINAL1: 22;
then
A10: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,C)) by
A2;
(
Tarski-Class (X,C))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A9,
Th15;
then (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A10;
hence thesis by
A4;
end;
now
assume for C holds B
<> (
succ C);
then (
Tarski-Class (X,B))
= { v : ex C st C
in B & v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,C)) } by
A7,
Th9,
ORDINAL1: 29;
hence thesis by
A4,
A6;
end;
hence thesis by
A8;
end;
hence thesis by
A4;
end;
for B holds
OnP[B] from
ORDINAL1:sch 2(
A1);
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:17
Th17: ex A st (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)))
proof
assume
A1: for A holds (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
<> (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)));
defpred
P[
object] means ex A st $1
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
consider Z such that
A2: for x be
object holds x
in Z iff x
in (
Tarski-Class X) &
P[x] from
XBOOLE_0:sch 1;
defpred
P[
object,
object] means ex A st $2
= A & $1
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) & not $1
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
A3: for x,y,z be
object st
P[x, y] &
P[x, z] holds y
= z
proof
let x,y,z be
object;
given A such that
A4: y
= A and
A5: x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) and
A6: not x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
given B such that
A7: z
= B and
A8: x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ B))) and
A9: not x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B));
assume
A10: y
<> z;
A
c= B or B
c= A;
then
A11: A
c< B or B
c< A by
A4,
A7,
A10;
now
assume A
c< B;
then (
succ A)
c= B by
ORDINAL1: 11,
ORDINAL1: 21;
then (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
Th16;
hence contradiction by
A5,
A9;
end;
then (
succ B)
c= A by
ORDINAL1: 11,
ORDINAL1: 21,
A11;
then (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ B)))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) by
Th16;
hence contradiction by
A6,
A8;
end;
consider Y such that
A12: for x be
object holds x
in Y iff ex y be
object st y
in Z &
P[y, x] from
TARSKI:sch 1(
A3);
now
let A;
A13: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) by
Th15;
consider x be
object such that
A14: not (x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) iff x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)))) by
A1,
TARSKI: 2;
x
in Z by
A2,
A14;
hence A
in Y by
A12,
A13,
A14;
end;
hence contradiction by
ORDINAL1: 26;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:18
Th18: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) implies (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
assume
A1: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)));
{}
c= A;
then
A2: (
Tarski-Class (X,
{} ))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) by
Th16;
A3: (
Tarski-Class (X,
{} ))
=
{X} & X
in
{X} by
Lm1,
TARSKI:def 1;
(
Tarski-Class (X,A))
is_Tarski-Class_of X
proof
thus X
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) by
A2,
A3;
A4: (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)))
= (({ u : ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) })
\/ ((
bool (
Tarski-Class (X,A)))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))) by
Lm1;
(
Tarski-Class X)
is_Tarski-Class_of X by
Def4;
then
A5: (
Tarski-Class X) is
Tarski;
thus for Z,Y be
set st Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & Y
c= Z holds Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
proof
let Z,Y be
set;
assume
A6: Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & Y
c= Z;
(
Tarski-Class X)
is_Tarski-Class_of X by
Def4;
then (
Tarski-Class X) is
Tarski;
then (
Tarski-Class X) is
subset-closed;
then
reconsider y = Y as
Element of (
Tarski-Class X) by
A6;
ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & y
c= v by
A6;
then Y
in { u : ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v };
then Y
in ({ u : ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) }) by
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
hence thesis by
A1,
A4,
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
end;
thus Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) implies (
bool Y)
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
proof
assume Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
then (
bool Y)
in { (
bool u) : u
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) };
then (
bool Y)
in ({ u : ex v st v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & u
c= v }
\/ { (
bool v) : v
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) }) by
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
hence thesis by
A1,
A4,
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
end;
let Y;
assume that
A7: Y
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) and
A8: not (Y,(
Tarski-Class (X,A)))
are_equipotent ;
Y
c= (
Tarski-Class X) by
A7,
XBOOLE_1: 1;
then (Y,(
Tarski-Class X))
are_equipotent or Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) by
A5;
hence thesis by
A1,
A7,
A8,
Th10,
CARD_1: 24;
end;
hence (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
c= (
Tarski-Class X) & (
Tarski-Class X)
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) by
Def4;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:19
Th19: ex A st (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
consider A such that
A1: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) by
Th17;
take A;
thus thesis by
A1,
Th18;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:20
ex A st (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class X) & for B st B
in A holds (
Tarski-Class (X,B))
<> (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
defpred
P[
Ordinal] means (
Tarski-Class (X,$1))
= (
Tarski-Class X);
A1: ex A st
P[A] by
Th19;
consider A such that
A2:
P[A] & for B st
P[B] holds A
c= B from
ORDINAL1:sch 1(
A1);
take A;
thus (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class X) by
A2;
let B;
assume B
in A;
hence thesis by
A2,
ORDINAL1: 5;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:21
Y
<> X & Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) implies ex A st not Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) & Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A)))
proof
assume that
A1: Y
<> X and
A2: Y
in (
Tarski-Class X);
defpred
P[
Ordinal] means Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,$1));
ex A st (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class X) by
Th19;
then
A3: ex A st
P[A] by
A2;
consider A such that
A4:
P[A] & for B st
P[B] holds A
c= B from
ORDINAL1:sch 1(
A3);
A5: not Y
in
{X} by
A1,
TARSKI:def 1;
A6: (
Tarski-Class (X,
{} ))
=
{X} by
Lm1;
now
assume A is
limit_ordinal;
then ex B st B
in A & Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A4,
A5,
A6,
Th13;
hence contradiction by
A4,
ORDINAL1: 5;
end;
then
consider B such that
A7: A
= (
succ B) by
ORDINAL1: 29;
take B;
not A
c= B by
A7,
ORDINAL1: 5,
ORDINAL1: 6;
hence thesis by
A4,
A7;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:22
Th22: X is
epsilon-transitive implies for A st A
<>
{} holds (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) is
epsilon-transitive
proof
assume
A1: Y
in X implies Y
c= X;
defpred
OnP[
Ordinal] means $1
<>
{} implies (
Tarski-Class (X,$1)) is
epsilon-transitive;
A2: for A st for B st B
in A holds
OnP[B] holds
OnP[A]
proof
let A such that
A3: for B st B
in A holds
OnP[B] and
A4: A
<>
{} ;
let Y such that
A5: Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,A));
A6:
now
given B such that
A7: A
= (
succ B);
A8: B
c= A by
ORDINAL1: 6,
ORDINAL1:def 2,
A7;
A9:
OnP[B] by
A3,
A7,
ORDINAL1: 6;
A10: (
Tarski-Class (X,B))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) by
A8,
Th16;
now
assume not Y
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,B));
then
consider Z such that
A11: Z
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) and
A12: Y
c= Z or Y
= (
bool Z) by
A5,
A7,
Th10;
A13: Y
= (
bool Z) implies thesis by
A7,
A11,
Th10;
now
assume
A14: Y
c= Z;
thus thesis
proof
let x be
object;
reconsider xx = x as
set by
TARSKI: 1;
assume
A15: x
in Y;
then
A16: x
in Z by
A14;
A17:
now
assume B
=
{} ;
then (
Tarski-Class (X,B))
=
{X} by
Lm1;
then Z
= X by
A11,
TARSKI:def 1;
hence thesis by
A7,
A11,
Th10,
A1,
A14,
A15;
end;
now
assume B
<>
{} ;
then Z
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A9,
A11,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
then x
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A16;
hence thesis by
A10;
end;
hence thesis by
A17;
end;
end;
hence thesis by
A12,
A13;
end;
hence thesis by
A10;
end;
now
assume
A18: for B holds A
<> (
succ B);
then A is
limit_ordinal by
ORDINAL1: 29;
then
consider B such that
A19: B
in A and
A20: Y
in (
Tarski-Class (X,B)) by
A4,
A5,
Th13;
A21: (
succ B)
<> A by
A18;
A22: (
Tarski-Class (X,B))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ B))) by
Th15;
A23: (
succ B)
c< A by
A19,
ORDINAL1: 21,
A21;
A24: (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ B)))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,A)) by
A19,
ORDINAL1: 21,
Th16;
(
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ B))) is
epsilon-transitive by
A3,
A23,
ORDINAL1: 11;
then Y
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ B))) by
A20,
A22;
hence thesis by
A24;
end;
hence thesis by
A6;
end;
thus for A holds
OnP[A] from
ORDINAL1:sch 2(
A2);
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:23
Th23: X is
epsilon-transitive implies (
Tarski-Class X) is
epsilon-transitive
proof
consider A such that
A1: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class X) by
Th19;
(
Tarski-Class (X,A))
c= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) by
Th15;
then
A2: (
Tarski-Class (X,A))
= (
Tarski-Class (X,(
succ A))) by
A1;
assume X is
epsilon-transitive;
hence thesis by
A1,
A2,
Th22;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:24
Th24: Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) implies (
card Y)
in (
card (
Tarski-Class X))
proof
assume
A1: Y
in (
Tarski-Class X);
(
bool Y)
c= (
Tarski-Class X) by
A1,
Th3;
then (
card Y)
in (
card (
bool Y)) & (
card (
bool Y))
c= (
card (
Tarski-Class X)) by
CARD_1: 11,
CARD_1: 14;
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:25
Th25: Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) implies not (Y,(
Tarski-Class X))
are_equipotent
proof
assume Y
in (
Tarski-Class X);
then (
card Y)
in (
card (
Tarski-Class X)) by
Th24;
then (
card Y)
<> (
card (
Tarski-Class X));
hence thesis by
CARD_1: 5;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:26
Th26: (x
in (
Tarski-Class X) implies
{x}
in (
Tarski-Class X)) & (x
in (
Tarski-Class X) & y
in (
Tarski-Class X) implies
{x, y}
in (
Tarski-Class X))
proof
now
assume x
in (
Tarski-Class X);
then (
bool x)
in (
Tarski-Class X) by
Th4;
hence
{x}
in (
Tarski-Class X) by
Th3,
ZFMISC_1: 68;
end;
assume that
A1: x
in (
Tarski-Class X) and
A2: y
in (
Tarski-Class X);
A3:
{x}
in (
Tarski-Class X) by
Z1,
A1;
(
bool
{x})
=
{
{} ,
{x}} by
ZFMISC_1: 24;
then
A4: not (
{
{} ,
{x}},(
Tarski-Class X))
are_equipotent by
A3,
Th4,
Th25;
now
assume
A5: x
<> y;
(
{
{} ,
{x}},
{x, y})
are_equipotent
proof
defpred
C[
object] means $1
=
{} ;
deffunc
f(
object) = x;
deffunc
g(
object) = y;
consider f such that
A6: (
dom f)
=
{
{} ,
{x}} & for z be
object st z
in
{
{} ,
{x}} holds (
C[z] implies (f
. z)
=
f(z)) & ( not
C[z] implies (f
. z)
=
g(z)) from
PARTFUN1:sch 1;
take f;
thus f is
one-to-one
proof
let x1,x2 be
object;
assume that
A7: x1
in (
dom f) and
A8: x2
in (
dom f);
A9: x2
=
{} or x2
=
{x} by
A6,
A8,
TARSKI:def 2;
A10: x1
=
{} implies (f
. x1)
= x by
A6,
A7;
x1
<>
{} implies (f
. x1)
= y by
A6,
A7;
hence thesis by
A5,
A6,
A7,
A8,
A9,
A10,
TARSKI:def 2;
end;
thus (
dom f)
=
{
{} ,
{x}} by
A6;
thus (
rng f)
c=
{x, y}
proof
let z be
object;
assume z
in (
rng f);
then ex u be
object st u
in (
dom f) & z
= (f
. u) by
FUNCT_1:def 3;
then z
= x or z
= y by
A6;
hence thesis by
TARSKI:def 2;
end;
let z be
object;
assume z
in
{x, y};
then
A11: z
= x or z
= y by
TARSKI:def 2;
A12:
{}
in (
dom f) by
A6,
TARSKI:def 2;
A13:
{x}
in (
dom f) by
A6,
TARSKI:def 2;
A14: (f
.
{} )
= x by
A6,
A12;
(f
.
{x})
= y by
A6,
A13;
hence thesis by
A11,
A12,
A13,
A14,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
end;
then
A15: not (
{x, y},(
Tarski-Class X))
are_equipotent by
A4,
WELLORD2: 15;
{x, y}
c= (
Tarski-Class X) by
A1,
A2,
ZFMISC_1: 32;
hence thesis by
A15,
Th5;
end;
hence thesis by
A3,
ENUMSET1: 29;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:27
Th27: x
in (
Tarski-Class X) & y
in (
Tarski-Class X) implies
[x, y]
in (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
assume x
in (
Tarski-Class X) & y
in (
Tarski-Class X);
then
{x, y}
in (
Tarski-Class X) &
{x}
in (
Tarski-Class X) by
Th26;
hence thesis by
Th26;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:28
Y
c= (
Tarski-Class X) & Z
c= (
Tarski-Class X) implies
[:Y, Z:]
c= (
Tarski-Class X)
proof
assume
A1: Y
c= (
Tarski-Class X) & Z
c= (
Tarski-Class X);
let x,y be
object;
assume
[x, y]
in
[:Y, Z:];
then x
in Y & y
in Z by
ZFMISC_1: 87;
hence thesis by
A1,
Th27;
end;
definition
let A;
::
CLASSES1:def6
func
Rank (A) ->
set means
:
Def6: ex L st it
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
= (
bool (L
. C))) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
= (
union (
rng (L
| C)));
correctness
proof
deffunc
C(
Ordinal,
set) = (
bool $2);
deffunc
D(
Ordinal,
Sequence) = (
union (
rng $2));
(ex x be
object, L st x
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
=
C(C,.)) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
=
D(C,|)) & for x1,x2 be
set st (ex L st x1
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
=
C(C,.)) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
=
D(C,|)) & (ex L st x2
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
=
C(C,.)) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
=
D(C,|)) holds x1
= x2 from
ORDINAL2:sch 7;
hence thesis;
end;
end
deffunc
F(
Ordinal) = (
Rank $1);
Lm2:
now
deffunc
C(
Ordinal,
set) = (
bool $2);
deffunc
D(
Ordinal,
Sequence) = (
union (
rng $2));
A1: for A holds for x be
object holds x
=
F(A) iff ex L st x
= (
last L) & (
dom L)
= (
succ A) & (L
.
0 )
=
{} & (for C st (
succ C)
in (
succ A) holds (L
. (
succ C))
=
C(C,.)) & for C st C
in (
succ A) & C
<>
0 & C is
limit_ordinal holds (L
. C)
=
D(C,|) by
Def6;
thus
F(0)
=
{} from
ORDINAL2:sch 8(
A1);
thus for A holds
F(succ)
=
C(A,F) from
ORDINAL2:sch 9(
A1);
thus A
<>
0 & A is
limit_ordinal & (
dom L)
= A & (for B st B
in A holds (L
. B)
= (
Rank B)) implies (
Rank A)
= (
union (
rng L))
proof
assume that
A2: A
<>
0 & A is
limit_ordinal and
A3: (
dom L)
= A and
A4: for B st B
in A holds (L
. B)
=
F(B);
thus
F(A)
=
D(A,L) from
ORDINAL2:sch 10(
A1,
A2,
A3,
A4);
end;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:29
(
Rank
{} )
=
{} by
Lm2;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:30
(
Rank (
succ A))
= (
bool (
Rank A)) by
Lm2;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:31
Th31: A
<>
{} & A is
limit_ordinal implies for x holds x
in (
Rank A) iff ex B st B
in A & x
in (
Rank B)
proof
assume
A1: A
<>
{} & A is
limit_ordinal;
consider L such that
A2: (
dom L)
= A & for B st B
in A holds (L
. B)
=
F(B) from
ORDINAL2:sch 2;
A3: (
Rank A)
= (
union (
rng L)) by
A1,
A2,
Lm2;
let x;
thus x
in (
Rank A) implies ex B st B
in A & x
in (
Rank B)
proof
assume x
in (
Rank A);
then
consider Y such that
A4: x
in Y and
A5: Y
in (
rng L) by
A3,
TARSKI:def 4;
consider y be
object such that
A6: y
in (
dom L) and
A7: Y
= (L
. y) by
A5,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
reconsider y as
Ordinal by
A6;
take y;
thus thesis by
A2,
A4,
A6,
A7;
end;
given B such that
A8: B
in A and
A9: x
in (
Rank B);
(L
. B)
= (
Rank B) by
A2,
A8;
then (
Rank B)
in (
rng L) by
A2,
A8,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
hence thesis by
A3,
A9,
TARSKI:def 4;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:32
Th32: X
c= (
Rank A) iff X
in (
Rank (
succ A))
proof
thus X
c= (
Rank A) implies X
in (
Rank (
succ A))
proof
assume X
c= (
Rank A);
then X
in (
bool (
Rank A));
hence thesis by
Lm2;
end;
assume X
in (
Rank (
succ A));
then X
in (
bool (
Rank A)) by
Lm2;
hence thesis;
end;
registration
let A;
cluster (
Rank A) ->
epsilon-transitive;
coherence
proof
defpred
P[
Ordinal] means for X holds X
in (
Rank $1) implies X
c= (
Rank $1);
A1: for A st for B st B
in A holds
P[B] holds
P[A]
proof
let A such that
A2: for B st B
in A holds
P[B];
let X such that
A3: X
in (
Rank A);
let x be
object such that
A4: x
in X;
reconsider xx = x as
set by
TARSKI: 1;
A5:
now
assume
A6: A is
limit_ordinal;
then
consider B such that
A7: B
in A and
A8: X
in (
Rank B) by
A3,
Lm2,
Th31;
X
c= (
Rank B) by
A2,
A7,
A8;
hence thesis by
A4,
A6,
A7,
Th31;
end;
now
assume not A is
limit_ordinal;
then
consider B such that
A9: A
= (
succ B) by
ORDINAL1: 29;
X
c= (
Rank B) by
A3,
A9,
Th32;
then xx
c= (
Rank B) by
A2,
A4,
A9,
ORDINAL1: 6;
hence thesis by
A9,
Th32;
end;
hence thesis by
A5;
end;
for A holds
P[A] from
ORDINAL1:sch 2(
A1);
hence
P[A];
end;
end
theorem ::
CLASSES1:33
(
Rank A)
c= (
Rank (
succ A))
proof
(
Rank A)
in (
bool (
Rank A)) by
ZFMISC_1:def 1;
then (
Rank A)
in (
Rank (
succ A)) by
Lm2;
hence thesis by
ORDINAL1:def 2;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:34
Th34: (
union (
Rank A))
c= (
Rank A)
proof
let x be
object;
assume x
in (
union (
Rank A));
then
consider X such that
A1: x
in X and
A2: X
in (
Rank A) by
TARSKI:def 4;
X
c= (
Rank A) by
A2,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
hence thesis by
A1;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:35
X
in (
Rank A) implies (
union X)
in (
Rank A)
proof
assume
A1: X
in (
Rank A);
A2:
now
given B such that
A3: A
= (
succ B);
A4: (
union X)
c= (
union (
Rank B)) by
ZFMISC_1: 77,
A1,
A3,
Th32;
(
union (
Rank B))
c= (
Rank B) by
Th34;
hence thesis by
A3,
Th32,
A4,
XBOOLE_1: 1;
end;
now
assume that
A5: A
<>
{} and
A6: for B holds A
<> (
succ B);
A7: A is
limit_ordinal by
A6,
ORDINAL1: 29;
then
consider B such that
A8: B
in A and
A9: X
in (
Rank B) by
A1,
A5,
Th31;
A10: (
union X)
c= (
union (
Rank B)) by
ZFMISC_1: 77,
A9,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
A11: (
union (
Rank B))
c= (
Rank B) by
Th34;
(
succ B)
<> A by
A6;
then
A12: (
succ B)
c< A by
A8,
ORDINAL1: 21;
A13: (
union X)
in (
Rank (
succ B)) by
A11,
Th32,
A10,
XBOOLE_1: 1;
(
succ B)
in A by
A12,
ORDINAL1: 11;
hence thesis by
A7,
A13,
Th31;
end;
hence thesis by
A1,
A2,
Lm2;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:36
Th36: A
in B iff (
Rank A)
in (
Rank B)
proof
defpred
OnP[
Ordinal,
Ordinal] means $1
in $2 implies (
Rank $1)
in (
Rank $2);
A1:
now
let A;
defpred
P[
Ordinal] means
OnP[A, $1];
A2: for B st for C st C
in B holds
P[C] holds
P[B]
proof
let B such that
A3: for C st C
in B holds
OnP[A, C] and
A4: A
in B;
A5:
now
given C such that
A6: B
= (
succ C);
A7: A
in C implies (
Rank A)
in (
Rank C) by
A3,
A6,
ORDINAL1: 6;
now
assume
A8: not A
in C;
A
c= C & A
<> C iff A
c< C;
hence (
Rank A)
= (
Rank C) by
A4,
A6,
A8,
ORDINAL1: 11,
ORDINAL1: 22;
end;
then (
Rank A)
c= (
Rank C) by
A7,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
hence thesis by
A6,
Th32;
end;
now
assume
A9: for C holds B
<> (
succ C);
then
A10: B is
limit_ordinal by
ORDINAL1: 29;
A11: B
<> (
succ A) by
A9;
(
succ A)
c< B by
A11,
A4,
ORDINAL1: 21;
then
A12: (
succ A)
in B by
ORDINAL1: 11;
(
Rank A)
in (
Rank (
succ A)) by
Th32;
hence thesis by
A10,
A12,
Th31;
end;
hence thesis by
A5;
end;
thus for B holds
P[B] from
ORDINAL1:sch 2(
A2);
end;
hence
OnP[A, B];
assume that
A13: (
Rank A)
in (
Rank B) and
A14: not A
in B;
B
in A or B
= A by
A14,
ORDINAL1: 14;
hence contradiction by
A1,
A13;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:37
Th37: A
c= B iff (
Rank A)
c= (
Rank B)
proof
thus A
c= B implies (
Rank A)
c= (
Rank B)
proof
A1: A
c< B iff A
c= B & A
<> B;
assume A
c= B;
then (
Rank A)
= (
Rank B) or (
Rank A)
in (
Rank B) by
Th36,
A1,
ORDINAL1: 11;
hence thesis by
ORDINAL1:def 2;
end;
assume that
A2: (
Rank A)
c= (
Rank B) and
A3: not A
c= B;
B
in A by
A3,
ORDINAL1: 16;
hence contradiction by
A2,
ORDINAL1: 5,
Th36;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:38
Th38: A
c= (
Rank A)
proof
defpred
P[
Ordinal] means $1
c= (
Rank $1);
A1:
P[
0 ] by
XBOOLE_1: 2;
A2:
P[B] implies
P[(
succ B)]
proof
assume B
c= (
Rank B);
then B
in (
Rank (
succ B)) by
Th32;
then B
c= (
Rank (
succ B)) &
{B}
c= (
Rank (
succ B)) by
ORDINAL1:def 2,
ZFMISC_1: 31;
hence thesis by
XBOOLE_1: 8;
end;
A3: for A st A
<>
0 & A is
limit_ordinal & for B st B
in A holds
P[B] holds
P[A]
proof
let A such that A
<>
0 and
A4: A is
limit_ordinal and
A5: for B st B
in A holds B
c= (
Rank B);
let x be
object;
assume
A6: x
in A;
then
reconsider B = x as
Ordinal;
A7: B
c= (
Rank B) by
A5,
A6;
A8: (
succ B)
c= A by
A4,
A6,
ORDINAL1: 28,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
A9: B
in (
Rank (
succ B)) by
A7,
Th32;
(
Rank (
succ B))
c= (
Rank A) by
A8,
Th37;
hence thesis by
A9;
end;
for B holds
P[B] from
ORDINAL2:sch 1(
A1,
A2,
A3);
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:39
for A, X st X
in (
Rank A) holds not (X,(
Rank A))
are_equipotent & (
card X)
in (
card (
Rank A))
proof
defpred
OnP[
Ordinal] means for X st X
in (
Rank $1) holds not (X,(
Rank $1))
are_equipotent ;
A1: for A st for B st B
in A holds
OnP[B] holds
OnP[A]
proof
let A such that
A2: for B st B
in A holds
OnP[B];
let X;
assume
A3: X
in (
Rank A);
A4:
now
given B such that
A5: A
= (
succ B);
A6: B
c= A by
A5,
ORDINAL1: 6,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
A7: (
Rank (
succ B))
= (
bool (
Rank B)) by
Lm2;
then
A8: not ((
Rank B),(
Rank A))
are_equipotent by
A5,
CARD_1: 13;
(
Rank B)
c= (
Rank A) by
A6,
Th37;
hence thesis by
A3,
A5,
A7,
A8,
CARD_1: 24;
end;
now
assume that
A9: A
<>
{} and
A10: for B holds A
<> (
succ B);
A is
limit_ordinal by
A10,
ORDINAL1: 29;
then
consider B such that
A11: B
in A and
A12: X
in (
Rank B) by
A3,
A9,
Th31;
A13: ( not (X,(
Rank B))
are_equipotent ) & X
c= (
Rank B) by
A2,
A11,
A12,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
(
Rank B)
c= (
Rank A) by
A11,
Th36,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
hence thesis by
A13,
CARD_1: 24;
end;
hence thesis by
A3,
A4,
Lm2;
end;
A14: for A holds
OnP[A] from
ORDINAL1:sch 2(
A1);
let A, X;
assume
A15: X
in (
Rank A);
A16: (
card X)
c= (
card (
Rank A)) by
A15,
CARD_1: 11,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
(
card X)
<> (
card (
Rank A)) by
A14,
A15,
CARD_1: 5;
hence thesis by
A14,
A15,
A16,
CARD_1: 3;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:40
X
c= (
Rank A) iff (
bool X)
c= (
Rank (
succ A))
proof
thus X
c= (
Rank A) implies (
bool X)
c= (
Rank (
succ A))
proof
assume
A1: X
c= (
Rank A);
let x be
object;
reconsider xx = x as
set by
TARSKI: 1;
assume x
in (
bool X);
then
A2: xx
c= (
Rank A) by
A1;
(
Rank (
succ A))
= (
bool (
Rank A)) by
Lm2;
hence thesis by
A2;
end;
assume
A3: (
bool X)
c= (
Rank (
succ A));
let x be
object;
assume x
in X;
then
{x}
c= X by
ZFMISC_1: 31;
then
A4:
{x}
in (
bool X);
(
Rank (
succ A))
= (
bool (
Rank A)) & x
in
{x} by
Lm2,
TARSKI:def 1;
hence thesis by
A3,
A4;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:41
Th41: X
c= Y & Y
in (
Rank A) implies X
in (
Rank A)
proof
assume that
A1: X
c= Y and
A2: Y
in (
Rank A);
A3:
now
given B such that
A4: A
= (
succ B);
A5: (
Rank (
succ B))
= (
bool (
Rank B)) by
Lm2;
then X
c= (
Rank B) by
A1,
A2,
A4,
XBOOLE_1: 1;
hence thesis by
A4,
A5;
end;
now
assume
A6: for B holds A
<> (
succ B);
then
A7: A is
limit_ordinal by
ORDINAL1: 29;
then
consider B such that
A8: B
in A and
A9: Y
in (
Rank B) by
A2,
Lm2,
Th31;
Y
c= (
Rank B) by
A9,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
then
A10: X
c= (
Rank B) by
A1;
A11: (
bool (
Rank B))
= (
Rank (
succ B)) by
Lm2;
(
succ B)
in A by
A6,
A8,
ORDINAL1: 28,
ORDINAL1: 29;
hence thesis by
A7,
A10,
A11,
Th31;
end;
hence thesis by
A3;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:42
Th42: X
in (
Rank A) iff (
bool X)
in (
Rank (
succ A))
proof
thus X
in (
Rank A) implies (
bool X)
in (
Rank (
succ A))
proof
assume
A1: X
in (
Rank A);
(
bool X)
c= (
Rank A) by
A1,
Th41;
hence thesis by
Th32;
end;
assume (
bool X)
in (
Rank (
succ A));
then X
in (
bool X) & (
bool X)
c= (
Rank A) by
Th32,
ZFMISC_1:def 1;
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:43
Th43: x
in (
Rank A) iff
{x}
in (
Rank (
succ A))
proof
x
in (
Rank A) iff
{x}
c= (
Rank A) by
ZFMISC_1: 31;
hence thesis by
Th32;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:44
Th44: x
in (
Rank A) & y
in (
Rank A) iff
{x, y}
in (
Rank (
succ A))
proof
x
in (
Rank A) & y
in (
Rank A) iff
{x, y}
c= (
Rank A) by
ZFMISC_1: 32;
hence thesis by
Th32;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:45
x
in (
Rank A) & y
in (
Rank A) iff
[x, y]
in (
Rank (
succ (
succ A)))
proof
A1: x
in (
Rank A) iff
{x}
in (
Rank (
succ A)) by
Th43;
x
in (
Rank A) & y
in (
Rank A) iff
{x, y}
in (
Rank (
succ A)) by
Th44;
hence thesis by
A1,
Th44;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:46
Th46: X is
epsilon-transitive & ((
Rank A)
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))
= ((
Rank (
succ A))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)) implies (
Tarski-Class X)
c= (
Rank A)
proof
assume that
A1: X is
epsilon-transitive and
A2: ((
Rank A)
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))
= ((
Rank (
succ A))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X));
given x be
object such that
A3: x
in (
Tarski-Class X) & not x
in (
Rank A);
x
in ((
Tarski-Class X)
\ (
Rank A)) by
A3,
XBOOLE_0:def 5;
then
consider Y such that
A4: Y
in ((
Tarski-Class X)
\ (
Rank A)) and
A5: not ex x be
object st x
in ((
Tarski-Class X)
\ (
Rank A)) & x
in Y by
TARSKI: 3;
A6: Y
c= (
Tarski-Class X) by
A4,
ORDINAL1:def 2,
A1,
Th23;
Y
c= (
Rank A)
proof
let x be
object;
assume
A7: x
in Y;
then not x
in ((
Tarski-Class X)
\ (
Rank A)) by
A5;
hence thesis by
A6,
A7,
XBOOLE_0:def 5;
end;
then Y
in (
Rank (
succ A)) by
Th32;
then
A8: Y
in ((
Rank (
succ A))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)) by
A4,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
not Y
in (
Rank A) by
A4,
XBOOLE_0:def 5;
hence contradiction by
A2,
A8,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:47
Th47: X is
epsilon-transitive implies ex A st (
Tarski-Class X)
c= (
Rank A)
proof
assume
A1: X is
epsilon-transitive;
assume
A2: not (
Tarski-Class X)
c= (
Rank A);
defpred
P[
object] means ex A st $1
in (
Rank A);
consider Power be
set such that
A3: for x be
object holds x
in Power iff x
in (
Tarski-Class X) &
P[x] from
XBOOLE_0:sch 1;
defpred
P[
object,
object] means ex A st $2
= A & not $1
in (
Rank A) & $1
in (
Rank (
succ A));
A4: for x,y,z be
object st
P[x, y] &
P[x, z] holds y
= z
proof
let x,y,z be
object;
given A1 be
Ordinal such that
A5: y
= A1 and
A6: not x
in (
Rank A1) and
A7: x
in (
Rank (
succ A1));
given A2 be
Ordinal such that
A8: z
= A2 and
A9: not x
in (
Rank A2) and
A10: x
in (
Rank (
succ A2));
assume y
<> z;
then
A11: A1
in A2 or A2
in A1 by
A5,
A8,
ORDINAL1: 14;
now
assume (
succ A1)
c= A2;
then (
Rank (
succ A1))
c= (
Rank A2) by
Th37;
hence contradiction by
A7,
A9;
end;
then (
Rank (
succ A2))
c= (
Rank A1) by
A11,
Th37,
ORDINAL1: 21;
hence contradiction by
A6,
A10;
end;
consider Y such that
A12: for x be
object holds x
in Y iff ex y be
object st y
in Power &
P[y, x] from
TARSKI:sch 1(
A4);
now
let A;
((
Rank A)
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))
<> ((
Rank (
succ A))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)) by
A1,
A2,
Th46;
then
consider y be
object such that
A13: not (y
in ((
Rank A)
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)) iff y
in ((
Rank (
succ A))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))) by
TARSKI: 2;
A14: A
c= (
succ A) by
ORDINAL1: 6,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
then
A15: (
Rank A)
c= (
Rank (
succ A)) by
Th37;
((
Rank A)
/\ (
Tarski-Class X))
c= ((
Rank (
succ A))
/\ (
Tarski-Class X)) by
XBOOLE_1: 26,
A14,
Th37;
then
A16: y
in (
Rank (
succ A)) by
A13,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
A17: y
in (
Tarski-Class X) by
A13,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
then
A18: not y
in (
Rank A) by
A13,
A15,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
y
in Power by
A3,
A16,
A17;
hence A
in Y by
A12,
A16,
A18;
end;
hence contradiction by
ORDINAL1: 26;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:48
Th48: X is
epsilon-transitive implies (
union X)
c= X
proof
assume
A1: Y
in X implies Y
c= X;
let x be
object;
assume x
in (
union X);
then
consider Y such that
A2: x
in Y and
A3: Y
in X by
TARSKI:def 4;
Y
c= X by
A1,
A3;
hence thesis by
A2;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:49
Th49: X is
epsilon-transitive & Y is
epsilon-transitive implies (X
\/ Y) is
epsilon-transitive
proof
assume that
A1: (Z
in X implies Z
c= X) and
A2: (Z
in Y implies Z
c= Y);
let Z;
assume Z
in (X
\/ Y);
then Z
in X or Z
in Y by
XBOOLE_0:def 3;
then
A3: Z
c= X or Z
c= Y by
A1,
A2;
X
c= (X
\/ Y) & Y
c= (X
\/ Y) by
XBOOLE_1: 7;
hence thesis by
A3;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:50
X is
epsilon-transitive & Y is
epsilon-transitive implies (X
/\ Y) is
epsilon-transitive
proof
assume that
A1: Z
in X implies Z
c= X and
A2: Z
in Y implies Z
c= Y;
let Z;
assume
A3: Z
in (X
/\ Y);
then
A4: Z
in X by
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
A5: Z
in Y by
A3,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
A6: Z
c= X by
A1,
A4;
Z
c= Y by
A2,
A5;
hence thesis by
A6,
XBOOLE_1: 19;
end;
reserve n for
Element of
omega ;
deffunc
f(
set,
set) = (
union $2);
definition
let X;
::
CLASSES1:def7
func
the_transitive-closure_of X ->
set means
:
Def7: for x be
object holds x
in it iff ex f, n st x
in (f
. n) & (
dom f)
=
omega & (f
.
0 )
= X & for k be
Nat holds (f
. (
succ k))
= (
union (f
. k));
existence
proof
consider f such that
A1: (
dom f)
=
omega & (f
.
0 )
= X & for n be
Nat holds (f
. (
succ n))
=
f(n,.) from
ORDINAL2:sch 18;
take UNI = (
union (
rng f));
let x be
object;
thus x
in UNI implies ex f, n st x
in (f
. n) & (
dom f)
=
omega & (f
.
0 )
= X & for k be
Nat holds (f
. (
succ k))
= (
union (f
. k))
proof
assume x
in UNI;
then
consider Y such that
A2: x
in Y and
A3: Y
in (
rng f) by
TARSKI:def 4;
consider y be
object such that
A4: y
in (
dom f) and
A5: Y
= (f
. y) by
A3,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
reconsider y as
Element of
omega by
A1,
A4;
take f, y;
thus thesis by
A1,
A2,
A5;
end;
deffunc
f(
set,
set) = (
union $2);
given g, n such that
A6: x
in (g
. n) and
A7: (
dom g)
=
omega and
A8: (g
.
0 )
= X and
A9: for k be
Nat holds (g
. (
succ k))
=
f(k,.);
A10: (
dom f)
=
omega by
A1;
A11: (f
.
0 )
= X by
A1;
A12: for n be
Nat holds (f
. (
succ n))
=
f(n,.) by
A1;
g
= f from
ORDINAL2:sch 20(
A7,
A8,
A9,
A10,
A11,
A12);
then (g
. n)
in (
rng f) by
A1,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
hence thesis by
A6,
TARSKI:def 4;
end;
uniqueness
proof
defpred
P[
object] means ex f, n st $1
in (f
. n) & (
dom f)
=
omega & (f
.
0 )
= X & for k be
Nat holds (f
. (
succ k))
= (
union (f
. k));
let U1,U2 be
set such that
A13: for x be
object holds x
in U1 iff
P[x] and
A14: for x be
object holds x
in U2 iff
P[x];
thus U1
= U2 from
XBOOLE_0:sch 2(
A13,
A14);
end;
end
registration
let X;
cluster (
the_transitive-closure_of X) ->
epsilon-transitive;
coherence
proof
let Y;
assume Y
in (
the_transitive-closure_of X);
then
consider f, n such that
A1: Y
in (f
. n) and
A2: (
dom f)
=
omega & (f
.
0 )
= X and
A3: for k be
Nat holds (f
. (
succ k))
= (
union (f
. k)) by
Def7;
let x be
object;
assume x
in Y;
then
A4: x
in (
union (f
. n)) by
A1,
TARSKI:def 4;
reconsider m = (
succ n) as
Element of
omega by
ORDINAL1:def 12;
x
in (f
. m) by
A3,
A4;
hence x
in (
the_transitive-closure_of X) by
A2,
A3,
Def7;
end;
end
theorem ::
CLASSES1:51
(
the_transitive-closure_of X) is
epsilon-transitive;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:52
Th52: X
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of X)
proof
let x be
object such that
A1: x
in X;
consider f such that
A2: (
dom f)
=
omega and
A3: (f
.
0 )
= X and
A4: for n be
Nat holds (f
. (
succ n))
=
f(n,.) from
ORDINAL2:sch 18;
reconsider z =
0 as
Element of
omega by
ORDINAL1:def 12;
x
in (f
. z) by
A1,
A3;
hence x
in (
the_transitive-closure_of X) by
A2,
A3,
A4,
Def7;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:53
Th53: X
c= Y & Y is
epsilon-transitive implies (
the_transitive-closure_of X)
c= Y
proof
assume that
A1: X
c= Y and
A2: Y is
epsilon-transitive;
let x be
object;
assume x
in (
the_transitive-closure_of X);
then
consider f, n such that
A3: x
in (f
. n) and (
dom f)
=
omega and
A4: (f
.
0 )
= X and
A5: for k be
Nat holds (f
. (
succ k))
= (
union (f
. k)) by
Def7;
defpred
P[
Nat] means (f
. $1)
c= Y;
A6:
P[
0 ] by
A1,
A4;
A7: for k be
Nat st
P[k] holds
P[(
succ k)]
proof
let k be
Nat;
assume (f
. k)
c= Y;
then
A8: (
union (f
. k))
c= (
union Y) by
ZFMISC_1: 77;
(f
. (
succ k))
= (
union (f
. k)) & (
union Y)
c= Y by
A2,
A5,
Th48;
hence thesis by
A8,
XBOOLE_1: 1;
end;
P[n] from
ORDINAL2:sch 17(
A6,
A7);
hence thesis by
A3;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:54
Th54: (for Z st X
c= Z & Z is
epsilon-transitive holds Y
c= Z) & X
c= Y & Y is
epsilon-transitive implies (
the_transitive-closure_of X)
= Y by
Th53,
Th52;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:55
Th55: X is
epsilon-transitive implies (
the_transitive-closure_of X)
= X
proof
for Z st X
c= Z & Z is
epsilon-transitive holds X
c= Z;
hence thesis by
Th54;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:56
(
the_transitive-closure_of
{} )
=
{} by
Th55;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:57
(
the_transitive-closure_of A)
= A by
Th55;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:58
Th58: X
c= Y implies (
the_transitive-closure_of X)
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of Y)
proof
assume
A1: X
c= Y;
Y
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of Y) by
Th52;
then X
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of Y) by
A1;
hence thesis by
Th53;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:59
(
the_transitive-closure_of (
the_transitive-closure_of X))
= (
the_transitive-closure_of X) by
Th55;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:60
(
the_transitive-closure_of (X
\/ Y))
= ((
the_transitive-closure_of X)
\/ (
the_transitive-closure_of Y))
proof
X
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of X) & Y
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of Y) by
Th52;
then
A1: (X
\/ Y)
c= ((
the_transitive-closure_of X)
\/ (
the_transitive-closure_of Y)) by
XBOOLE_1: 13;
(
the_transitive-closure_of (X
\/ Y))
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of ((
the_transitive-closure_of X)
\/ (
the_transitive-closure_of Y))) by
A1,
Th58;
hence (
the_transitive-closure_of (X
\/ Y))
c= ((
the_transitive-closure_of X)
\/ (
the_transitive-closure_of Y)) by
Th49,
Th55;
(
the_transitive-closure_of X)
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of (X
\/ Y)) & (
the_transitive-closure_of Y)
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of (X
\/ Y)) by
Th58,
XBOOLE_1: 7;
hence thesis by
XBOOLE_1: 8;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:61
(
the_transitive-closure_of (X
/\ Y))
c= ((
the_transitive-closure_of X)
/\ (
the_transitive-closure_of Y))
proof
(
the_transitive-closure_of (X
/\ Y))
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of X) & (
the_transitive-closure_of (X
/\ Y))
c= (
the_transitive-closure_of Y) by
Th58,
XBOOLE_1: 17;
hence thesis by
XBOOLE_1: 19;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:62
Th62: ex A st X
c= (
Rank A)
proof
consider A such that
A1: (
Tarski-Class (
the_transitive-closure_of X))
c= (
Rank A) by
Th47;
take A;
(
the_transitive-closure_of X)
in (
Tarski-Class (
the_transitive-closure_of X)) by
Th2;
then X
in (
Tarski-Class (
the_transitive-closure_of X)) by
Th3,
Th52;
hence thesis by
A1,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
end;
definition
let x be
object;
::
CLASSES1:def8
func
the_rank_of x ->
Ordinal means
:
Def8: x
in (
Rank (
succ it )) & for B st x
in (
Rank (
succ B)) holds it
c= B;
existence
proof
defpred
P[
Ordinal] means x
in (
Rank (
succ $1));
reconsider x as
set by
TARSKI: 1;
consider A such that
A1: x
c= (
Rank A) by
Th62;
x
in (
bool (
Rank A)) by
A1;
then x
in (
Rank (
succ A)) by
Lm2;
then
A2: ex A st
P[A];
thus ex A st
P[A] & for B st
P[B] holds A
c= B from
ORDINAL1:sch 1(
A2);
end;
uniqueness ;
end
definition
let X;
:: original:
the_rank_of
redefine
::
CLASSES1:def9
func
the_rank_of X means
:
Def9: X
c= (
Rank it ) & for B st X
c= (
Rank B) holds it
c= B;
compatibility
proof
let O be
Ordinal;
thus O
= (
the_rank_of X) implies X
c= (
Rank O) & for B st X
c= (
Rank B) holds O
c= B
proof
assume
A1: O
= (
the_rank_of X);
then X
in (
Rank (
succ O)) by
Def8;
then X
in (
bool (
Rank O)) by
Lm2;
hence X
c= (
Rank O);
let B;
assume X
c= (
Rank B);
then X
in (
bool (
Rank B));
then X
in (
Rank (
succ B)) by
Lm2;
hence O
c= B by
A1,
Def8;
end;
assume X
c= (
Rank O);
then X
in (
bool (
Rank O));
then
A2: X
in (
Rank (
succ O)) by
Lm2;
assume
A3: for B st X
c= (
Rank B) holds O
c= B;
for B st X
in (
Rank (
succ B)) holds O
c= B
proof
let B;
assume X
in (
Rank (
succ B));
then X
in (
bool (
Rank B)) by
Lm2;
hence O
c= B by
A3;
end;
hence O
= (
the_rank_of X) by
A2,
Def8;
end;
end
theorem ::
CLASSES1:63
Th63: (
the_rank_of (
bool X))
= (
succ (
the_rank_of X))
proof
A1: X
c= (
Rank (
the_rank_of X)) by
Def9;
A2: (
bool X)
c= (
Rank (
succ (
the_rank_of X)))
proof
let x be
object;
reconsider xx = x as
set by
TARSKI: 1;
assume x
in (
bool X);
then
A3: xx
c= (
Rank (
the_rank_of X)) by
A1;
(
bool (
Rank (
the_rank_of X)))
= (
Rank (
succ (
the_rank_of X))) by
Lm2;
hence thesis by
A3;
end;
for A st (
bool X)
c= (
Rank A) holds (
succ (
the_rank_of X))
c= A
proof
let A such that
A4: (
bool X)
c= (
Rank A);
defpred
P[
Ordinal] means X
in (
Rank $1);
A5: X
in (
bool X) by
ZFMISC_1:def 1;
then
A6: ex A st
P[A] by
A4;
consider B such that
A7:
P[B] & for C st
P[C] holds B
c= C from
ORDINAL1:sch 1(
A6);
now
assume for C holds B
<> (
succ C);
then B is
limit_ordinal by
ORDINAL1: 29;
then ex C st C
in B & X
in (
Rank C) by
A7,
Lm2,
Th31;
hence contradiction by
A7,
ORDINAL1: 5;
end;
then
consider C such that
A8: B
= (
succ C);
X
c= (
Rank C) by
A7,
A8,
Th32;
then (
the_rank_of X)
c= C by
Def9;
then
A9: (
the_rank_of X)
in B by
A8,
ORDINAL1: 22;
B
c= A by
A4,
A5,
A7;
hence thesis by
A9,
ORDINAL1: 21;
end;
hence thesis by
A2,
Def9;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:64
(
the_rank_of (
Rank A))
= A
proof
for B st (
Rank A)
c= (
Rank B) holds A
c= B by
Th37;
hence thesis by
Def9;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:65
Th65: X
c= (
Rank A) iff (
the_rank_of X)
c= A
proof
thus X
c= (
Rank A) implies (
the_rank_of X)
c= A by
Def9;
assume (
the_rank_of X)
c= A;
then
A1: (
Rank (
the_rank_of X))
c= (
Rank A) by
Th37;
X
c= (
Rank (
the_rank_of X)) by
Def9;
hence thesis by
A1;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:66
Th66: X
in (
Rank A) iff (
the_rank_of X)
in A
proof
thus X
in (
Rank A) implies (
the_rank_of X)
in A
proof
assume X
in (
Rank A);
then (
bool X)
in (
Rank (
succ A)) by
Th42;
then
A1: (
bool X)
c= (
Rank A) by
Th32;
(
the_rank_of (
bool X))
= (
succ (
the_rank_of X)) by
Th63;
then
A2: (
the_rank_of X)
in (
the_rank_of (
bool X)) by
ORDINAL1: 6;
(
the_rank_of (
bool X))
c= A by
A1,
Def9;
hence thesis by
A2;
end;
assume
A3: (
the_rank_of X)
in A;
X
c= (
Rank (
the_rank_of X)) by
Def9;
then
A4: X
in (
Rank (
succ (
the_rank_of X))) by
Th32;
(
Rank (
succ (
the_rank_of X)))
c= (
Rank A) by
A3,
Th37,
ORDINAL1: 21;
hence thesis by
A4;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:67
X
c= Y implies (
the_rank_of X)
c= (
the_rank_of Y)
proof
assume
A1: X
c= Y;
Y
c= (
Rank (
the_rank_of Y)) by
Def9;
then X
c= (
Rank (
the_rank_of Y)) by
A1;
hence thesis by
Def9;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:68
Th68: X
in Y implies (
the_rank_of X)
in (
the_rank_of Y)
proof
assume
A1: X
in Y;
Y
c= (
Rank (
the_rank_of Y)) by
Def9;
hence thesis by
A1,
Th66;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:69
Th69: (
the_rank_of X)
c= A iff for Y st Y
in X holds (
the_rank_of Y)
in A
proof
set R = (
the_rank_of X);
A1: X
c= (
Rank R) by
Def9;
thus (
the_rank_of X)
c= A implies for Y st Y
in X holds (
the_rank_of Y)
in A by
A1,
Th66;
assume
A2: for Y st Y
in X holds (
the_rank_of Y)
in A;
X
c= (
Rank A)
proof
let x be
object;
reconsider xx = x as
set by
TARSKI: 1;
assume x
in X;
then (
the_rank_of xx)
in A by
A2;
hence thesis by
Th66;
end;
hence thesis by
Def9;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:70
Th70: A
c= (
the_rank_of X) iff for B st B
in A holds ex Y st Y
in X & B
c= (
the_rank_of Y)
proof
thus A
c= (
the_rank_of X) implies for B st B
in A holds ex Y st Y
in X & B
c= (
the_rank_of Y)
proof
assume
A1: A
c= (
the_rank_of X);
let B;
assume B
in A;
then not (
the_rank_of X)
c= B by
A1,
ORDINAL1: 5;
then not X
c= (
Rank B) by
Def9;
then
A2: (X
\ (
Rank B))
<>
{} by
XBOOLE_1: 37;
set x = the
Element of (X
\ (
Rank B));
take x;
A3: not x
in (
Rank B) by
A2,
XBOOLE_0:def 5;
thus x
in X by
A2,
XBOOLE_0:def 5;
thus thesis by
ORDINAL1: 16,
A3,
Th66;
end;
assume
A4: for B st B
in A holds ex Y st Y
in X & B
c= (
the_rank_of Y);
let x be
object;
assume
A5: x
in A;
then
reconsider x as
Ordinal;
consider Y such that
A6: Y
in X and
A7: x
c= (
the_rank_of Y) by
A4,
A5;
(
the_rank_of Y)
in (
the_rank_of X) by
A6,
Th68;
hence thesis by
A7,
ORDINAL1: 12;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:71
(
the_rank_of X)
=
{} iff X
=
{}
proof
thus (
the_rank_of X)
=
{} implies X
=
{}
proof
assume (
the_rank_of X)
=
{} ;
then X
c= (
Rank
{} ) by
Def9;
hence thesis by
Lm2;
end;
assume X
=
{} ;
then for Y st Y
in X holds (
the_rank_of Y)
in
{} ;
hence (
the_rank_of X)
c=
{} by
Th69;
thus
{}
c= (
the_rank_of X);
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:72
Th72: (
the_rank_of X)
= (
succ A) implies ex Y st Y
in X & (
the_rank_of Y)
= A
proof
assume
A1: (
the_rank_of X)
= (
succ A);
consider Y such that
A2: Y
in X and
A3: A
c= (
the_rank_of Y) by
A1,
Th70,
ORDINAL1: 6;
take Y;
(
the_rank_of Y)
c= A by
A1,
ORDINAL1: 22,
A2,
Th68;
hence thesis by
A2,
A3;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:73
(
the_rank_of A)
= A
proof
A
c= (
Rank A) by
Th38;
hence (
the_rank_of A)
c= A by
Th65;
defpred
P[
Ordinal] means $1
c= (
the_rank_of $1);
A1: for A st for B st B
in A holds
P[B] holds
P[A]
proof
let A such that
A2: for B st B
in A holds B
c= (
the_rank_of B);
now
let B such that
A3: B
in A;
reconsider Y = B as
set;
take Y;
thus Y
in A & B
c= (
the_rank_of Y) by
A2,
A3;
end;
hence thesis by
Th70;
end;
P[B] from
ORDINAL1:sch 2(
A1);
hence thesis;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:74
(
the_rank_of (
Tarski-Class X))
<>
{} & (
the_rank_of (
Tarski-Class X)) is
limit_ordinal
proof
A1: (
Tarski-Class X)
c= (
Rank (
the_rank_of (
Tarski-Class X))) by
Def9;
thus (
the_rank_of (
Tarski-Class X))
<>
{}
proof
assume (
the_rank_of (
Tarski-Class X))
=
{} ;
then (
Tarski-Class X)
c=
{} by
Def9,
Lm2;
hence contradiction;
end;
assume not thesis;
then
consider A such that
A2: (
the_rank_of (
Tarski-Class X))
= (
succ A) by
ORDINAL1: 29;
consider Y such that
A3: Y
in (
Tarski-Class X) and
A4: (
the_rank_of Y)
= A by
A2,
Th72;
A5: (
bool Y)
in (
Tarski-Class X) by
A3,
Th4;
A6: (
the_rank_of (
bool Y))
= (
succ A) by
A4,
Th63;
(
bool Y)
c= (
Rank A) by
A1,
A2,
A5,
Th32;
then (
succ A)
c= A by
A6,
Def9;
then A
in A by
ORDINAL1: 21;
hence contradiction;
end;
begin
reserve e,u for
set;
scheme ::
CLASSES1:sch1
NonUniqFuncEx { X() ->
set , P[
object,
object] } :
ex f be
Function st (
dom f)
= X() & for e be
object st e
in X() holds P[e, (f
. e)]
provided
A1: for e be
object st e
in X() holds ex u be
object st P[e, u];
per cases ;
suppose X()
=
{} ;
then
A2: for e be
object st e
in X() holds ex u be
object st u
in
{} & P[e, u];
ex f be
Function st (
dom f)
= X() & (
rng f)
c=
{} & for e be
object st e
in X() holds P[e, (f
. e)] from
FUNCT_1:sch 6(
A2);
hence thesis;
end;
suppose X()
<>
{} ;
then
reconsider D = X() as non
empty
set;
defpred
Q[
set,
Ordinal] means ex u st u
in (
Rank $2) & P[$1, u];
A3: for e be
Element of D holds ex A st
Q[e, A]
proof
let e be
Element of D;
consider u be
object such that
A4: P[e, u] by
A1;
reconsider u as
set by
TARSKI: 1;
u
c= (
Rank (
the_rank_of u)) by
Def9;
then u
in (
Rank (
succ (
the_rank_of u))) by
Th32;
hence thesis by
A4;
end;
consider F be
Function such that
A5: (
dom F)
= D & for d be
Element of D holds ex A st A
= (F
. d) &
Q[d, A] & for B st
Q[d, B] holds A
c= B from
ORDINAL1:sch 6(
A3);
A6: for e be
object st e
in X() holds ex u be
object st u
in (
Rank (
sup (
rng F))) & P[e, u]
proof
let e be
object;
assume
A7: e
in X();
then
consider A such that
A8: A
= (F
. e) and
A9: ex u st u
in (
Rank A) & P[e, u] and for B st ex u st u
in (
Rank B) & P[e, u] holds A
c= B by
A5;
consider u such that
A10: u
in (
Rank A) & P[e, u] by
A9;
take u;
A
in (
rng F) by
A5,
A7,
A8,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
then A
in (
sup (
rng F)) by
ORDINAL2: 19;
then (
Rank A)
c= (
Rank (
sup (
rng F))) by
Th37,
ORDINAL1:def 2;
hence thesis by
A10;
end;
ex f be
Function st (
dom f)
= X() & (
rng f)
c= (
Rank (
sup (
rng F))) & for e be
object st e
in X() holds P[e, (f
. e)] from
FUNCT_1:sch 6(
A6);
hence thesis;
end;
end;
definition
let F,G be
Relation;
::
CLASSES1:def10
pred F,G
are_fiberwise_equipotent means for x be
object holds (
card (
Coim (F,x)))
= (
card (
Coim (G,x)));
reflexivity ;
symmetry ;
end
Lm3: for F be
Function, x be
object st not x
in (
rng F) holds (
Coim (F,x))
=
{}
proof
let F be
Function, x be
object;
assume
A1: not x
in (
rng F);
now
assume (
rng F)
meets
{x};
then ex y be
object st y
in (
rng F) & y
in
{x} by
XBOOLE_0: 3;
hence contradiction by
A1,
TARSKI:def 1;
end;
hence thesis by
RELAT_1: 138;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:75
Th75: for F,G be
Function st (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent holds (
rng F)
= (
rng G)
proof
let F,G be
Function;
assume
A1: (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent ;
thus (
rng F)
c= (
rng G)
proof
let x be
object;
assume that
A2: x
in (
rng F) and
A3: not x
in (
rng G);
A4: (
card (
Coim (F,x)))
= (
card (
Coim (G,x))) by
A1;
A5: ex y be
object st y
in (
dom F) & (F
. y)
= x by
A2,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
(
Coim (G,x))
=
{} by
A3,
Lm3;
then x
in
{x} & (F
"
{x})
=
{} by
A4,
CARD_1: 5,
CARD_1: 26,
TARSKI:def 1;
hence contradiction by
A5,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
end;
let x be
object;
assume that
A6: x
in (
rng G) and
A7: not x
in (
rng F);
A8: (
card (
Coim (G,x)))
= (
card (
Coim (F,x))) by
A1;
A9: ex y be
object st y
in (
dom G) & (G
. y)
= x by
A6,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
(
Coim (F,x))
=
{} by
A7,
Lm3;
then x
in
{x} & (
Coim (G,x))
=
{} by
A8,
CARD_1: 5,
CARD_1: 26,
TARSKI:def 1;
hence contradiction by
A9,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:76
for F,G,H be
Function st (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent & (F,H)
are_fiberwise_equipotent holds (G,H)
are_fiberwise_equipotent
proof
let F,G,H be
Function;
assume that
A1: (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent and
A2: (F,H)
are_fiberwise_equipotent ;
let x be
object;
thus (
card (
Coim (G,x)))
= (
card (
Coim (F,x))) by
A1
.= (
card (
Coim (H,x))) by
A2;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:77
Th77: for F,G be
Function holds (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent iff ex H be
Function st (
dom H)
= (
dom F) & (
rng H)
= (
dom G) & H is
one-to-one & F
= (G
* H)
proof
let F,G be
Function;
thus (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent implies ex H be
Function st (
dom H)
= (
dom F) & (
rng H)
= (
dom G) & H is
one-to-one & F
= (G
* H)
proof
assume
A1: (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent ;
defpred
P[
object,
object] means $2 is
Function & for f be
Function st $2
= f holds (
dom f)
= (F
"
{$1}) & (
rng f)
= (G
"
{$1}) & f is
one-to-one;
A2: for x be
object st x
in (
rng F) holds ex y be
object st
P[x, y]
proof
let x be
object;
assume x
in (
rng F);
(
card (
Coim (F,x)))
= (
card (
Coim (G,x))) by
A1;
then
consider H be
Function such that
A3: H is
one-to-one & (
dom H)
= (F
"
{x}) & (
rng H)
= (G
"
{x}) by
WELLORD2:def 4,
CARD_1: 5;
take H;
thus H is
Function;
let g be
Function;
assume g
= H;
hence thesis by
A3;
end;
consider W be
Function such that
A4: (
dom W)
= (
rng F) & for x be
object st x
in (
rng F) holds
P[x, (W
. x)] from
NonUniqFuncEx(
A2);
defpred
Q[
object,
object] means for H be
Function st H
= (W
. (F
. $1)) holds $2
= (H
. $1);
set df = (
dom F), dg = (
dom G);
A5: for x be
object st x
in df holds ex y be
object st y
in dg &
Q[x, y]
proof
let x be
object;
assume
A6: x
in df;
then
A7: (F
. x)
in (
rng F) by
FUNCT_1:def 3;
then
reconsider f = (W
. (F
. x)) as
Function by
A4;
A8: (
dom f)
= (F
"
{(F
. x)}) & (
rng f)
= (G
"
{(F
. x)}) by
A4,
A7;
take y = (f
. x);
(F
. x)
in
{(F
. x)} by
TARSKI:def 1;
then x
in (F
"
{(F
. x)}) by
A6,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then (f
. x)
in (G
"
{(F
. x)}) by
A8,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
hence y
in dg by
FUNCT_1:def 7;
let g be
Function;
assume g
= (W
. (F
. x));
hence thesis;
end;
consider IT be
Function such that
A9: (
dom IT)
= df & (
rng IT)
c= dg & for x be
object st x
in df holds
Q[x, (IT
. x)] from
FUNCT_1:sch 6(
A5);
take IT;
thus (
dom IT)
= df by
A9;
(
dom G)
c= (
rng IT)
proof
let x be
object;
assume
A10: x
in dg;
then
A11: (G
. x)
in (
rng G) by
FUNCT_1:def 3;
A12: (
rng F)
= (
rng G) by
A1,
Th75;
then
reconsider f = (W
. (G
. x)) as
Function by
A4,
A11;
A13: (
dom f)
= (F
"
{(G
. x)}) by
A4,
A11,
A12;
A14: (
rng f)
= (G
"
{(G
. x)}) by
A4,
A11,
A12;
(G
. x)
in
{(G
. x)} by
TARSKI:def 1;
then x
in (
rng f) by
A10,
A14,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then
consider z be
object such that
A15: z
in (
dom f) and
A16: (f
. z)
= x by
FUNCT_1:def 3;
A17: z
in df by
A13,
A15,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
(F
. z)
in
{(G
. x)} by
A13,
A15,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then (F
. z)
= (G
. x) by
TARSKI:def 1;
then (IT
. z)
= x by
A9,
A16,
A17;
hence thesis by
A9,
A17,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
end;
hence (
rng IT)
= dg by
A9;
now
let x,y be
object;
assume that
A18: x
in (
dom IT) and
A19: y
in (
dom IT) and
A20: (IT
. x)
= (IT
. y);
A21: (F
. x)
in (
rng F) by
A9,
A18,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
A22: (F
. y)
in (
rng F) by
A9,
A19,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
then
reconsider f1 = (W
. (F
. x)), f2 = (W
. (F
. y)) as
Function by
A4,
A21;
A23: (IT
. x)
= (f1
. x) & (IT
. y)
= (f2
. y) by
A9,
A18,
A19;
A24: (
dom f1)
= (F
"
{(F
. x)}) by
A4,
A21;
A25: (
rng f1)
= (G
"
{(F
. x)}) by
A4,
A21;
A26: f1 is
one-to-one by
A4,
A21;
A27: (
dom f2)
= (F
"
{(F
. y)}) by
A4,
A22;
A28: (
rng f2)
= (G
"
{(F
. y)}) by
A4,
A22;
A29: (F
. x)
in
{(F
. x)} by
TARSKI:def 1;
A30: (F
. y)
in
{(F
. y)} by
TARSKI:def 1;
A31: x
in (F
"
{(F
. x)}) by
A9,
A18,
A29,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
A32: y
in (F
"
{(F
. y)}) by
A9,
A19,
A30,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
A33: (f1
. x)
in (
rng f1) by
A24,
A31,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
(f2
. y)
in (
rng f2) by
A27,
A32,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
then (f1
. x)
in ((G
"
{(F
. x)})
/\ (G
"
{(F
. y)})) by
A20,
A23,
A25,
A28,
A33,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
then (f1
. x)
in (G
" (
{(F
. x)}
/\
{(F
. y)})) by
FUNCT_1: 68;
then
A34: (G
. (f1
. x))
in (
{(F
. x)}
/\
{(F
. y)}) by
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then
A35: (G
. (f1
. x))
in
{(F
. x)} by
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
A36: (G
. (f1
. x))
in
{(F
. y)} by
A34,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
A37: (G
. (f1
. x))
= (F
. x) by
A35,
TARSKI:def 1;
(G
. (f1
. x))
= (F
. y) by
A36,
TARSKI:def 1;
hence x
= y by
A20,
A23,
A24,
A26,
A31,
A32,
A37;
end;
hence IT is
one-to-one;
A38: (
dom (G
* IT))
= df by
A9,
RELAT_1: 27;
now
let x be
object;
assume
A39: x
in df;
then
A40: (F
. x)
in (
rng F) by
FUNCT_1:def 3;
then
reconsider f = (W
. (F
. x)) as
Function by
A4;
A41: (
dom f)
= (F
"
{(F
. x)}) & (
rng f)
= (G
"
{(F
. x)}) by
A4,
A40;
(F
. x)
in
{(F
. x)} by
TARSKI:def 1;
then x
in (F
"
{(F
. x)}) by
A39,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then (f
. x)
in (G
"
{(F
. x)}) by
A41,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
then (G
. (f
. x))
in
{(F
. x)} by
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then
A42: (G
. (f
. x))
= (F
. x) by
TARSKI:def 1;
(IT
. x)
= (f
. x) by
A9,
A39;
hence (F
. x)
= ((G
* IT)
. x) by
A9,
A39,
A42,
FUNCT_1: 13;
end;
hence thesis by
A38;
end;
given H be
Function such that
A43: (
dom H)
= (
dom F) and
A44: (
rng H)
= (
dom G) and
A45: H is
one-to-one and
A46: F
= (G
* H);
let x be
object;
set t = (H
| (F
"
{x}));
A47: t is
one-to-one by
A45,
FUNCT_1: 52;
A48: (
dom t)
= (F
"
{x}) by
A43,
RELAT_1: 62,
RELAT_1: 132;
(
rng t)
= (G
"
{x})
proof
thus (
rng t)
c= (G
"
{x})
proof
let z be
object;
assume z
in (
rng t);
then
consider y be
object such that
A49: y
in (
dom t) and
A50: (t
. y)
= z by
FUNCT_1:def 3;
(F
. y)
in
{x} by
A48,
A49,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then
A51: (F
. y)
= x by
TARSKI:def 1;
A52: z
= (H
. y) by
A49,
A50,
FUNCT_1: 47;
(
dom t)
= ((
dom H)
/\ (F
"
{x})) by
RELAT_1: 61;
then
A53: y
in (
dom H) by
A49,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
then
A54: z
in (
dom G) by
A44,
A52,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
x
= (G
. z) by
A46,
A51,
A52,
A53,
FUNCT_1: 13;
then (G
. z)
in
{x} by
TARSKI:def 1;
hence thesis by
A54,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
end;
let z be
object;
assume
A55: z
in (G
"
{x});
then
A56: z
in (
dom G) by
FUNCT_1:def 7;
(G
. z)
in
{x} by
A55,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then
A57: (G
. z)
= x by
TARSKI:def 1;
consider y be
object such that
A58: y
in (
dom H) and
A59: (H
. y)
= z by
A44,
A56,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
(F
. y)
= x by
A46,
A57,
A58,
A59,
FUNCT_1: 13;
then (F
. y)
in
{x} by
TARSKI:def 1;
then
A60: y
in (
dom t) by
A43,
A48,
A58,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then (t
. y)
in (
rng t) by
FUNCT_1:def 3;
hence thesis by
A59,
A60,
FUNCT_1: 47;
end;
hence thesis by
CARD_1: 5,
A47,
A48,
WELLORD2:def 4;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:78
Th78: for F,G be
Function holds (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent iff for X be
set holds (
card (F
" X))
= (
card (G
" X))
proof
let F,G be
Function;
thus (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent implies for X be
set holds (
card (F
" X))
= (
card (G
" X))
proof
assume (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent ;
then
consider H be
Function such that
A1: (
dom H)
= (
dom F) and
A2: (
rng H)
= (
dom G) and
A3: H is
one-to-one and
A4: F
= (G
* H) by
Th77;
let X be
set;
set t = (H
| (F
" X));
A5: t is
one-to-one by
A3,
FUNCT_1: 52;
A6: (
dom t)
= (F
" X) by
A1,
RELAT_1: 62,
RELAT_1: 132;
(
rng t)
= (G
" X)
proof
thus (
rng t)
c= (G
" X)
proof
let z be
object;
assume z
in (
rng t);
then
consider y be
object such that
A7: y
in (
dom t) and
A8: (t
. y)
= z by
FUNCT_1:def 3;
A9: (F
. y)
in X by
A6,
A7,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
A10: z
= (H
. y) by
A7,
A8,
FUNCT_1: 47;
(
dom t)
= ((
dom H)
/\ (F
" X)) by
RELAT_1: 61;
then
A11: y
in (
dom H) by
A7,
XBOOLE_0:def 4;
then
A12: z
in (
dom G) by
A2,
A10,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
(G
. z)
in X by
A4,
A9,
A10,
A11,
FUNCT_1: 13;
hence thesis by
A12,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
end;
let z be
object;
assume
A13: z
in (G
" X);
then
A14: z
in (
dom G) by
FUNCT_1:def 7;
A15: (G
. z)
in X by
A13,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
consider y be
object such that
A16: y
in (
dom H) and
A17: (H
. y)
= z by
A2,
A14,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
(F
. y)
in X by
A4,
A15,
A16,
A17,
FUNCT_1: 13;
then
A18: y
in (
dom t) by
A1,
A6,
A16,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
then (t
. y)
in (
rng t) by
FUNCT_1:def 3;
hence thesis by
A17,
A18,
FUNCT_1: 47;
end;
hence thesis by
CARD_1: 5,
A5,
A6,
WELLORD2:def 4;
end;
assume for X be
set holds (
card (F
" X))
= (
card (G
" X));
hence for x be
object holds (
card (
Coim (F,x)))
= (
card (
Coim (G,x)));
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:79
for D be non
empty
set, F,G be
Function st (
rng F)
c= D & (
rng G)
c= D & for d be
Element of D holds (
card (
Coim (F,d)))
= (
card (
Coim (G,d))) holds (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent
proof
let D be non
empty
set, F,G be
Function;
assume that
A1: (
rng F)
c= D and
A2: (
rng G)
c= D;
assume
A3: for d be
Element of D holds (
card (
Coim (F,d)))
= (
card (
Coim (G,d)));
let x be
object;
per cases ;
suppose not x
in (
rng F);
then
A4: (
Coim (F,x))
=
{} by
Lm3;
now
assume
A5: x
in (
rng G);
then
reconsider d = x as
Element of D by
A2;
(
card (
Coim (G,d)))
= (
card (
Coim (F,d))) by
A3;
then
A6: (G
"
{x})
=
{} by
A4,
CARD_1: 5,
CARD_1: 26;
consider y be
object such that
A7: y
in (
dom G) and
A8: (G
. y)
= x by
A5,
FUNCT_1:def 3;
(G
. y)
in
{x} by
A8,
TARSKI:def 1;
hence contradiction by
A6,
A7,
FUNCT_1:def 7;
end;
hence thesis by
A4,
Lm3;
end;
suppose x
in (
rng F);
then
reconsider d = x as
Element of D by
A1;
(
card (
Coim (F,d)))
= (
card (
Coim (G,d))) by
A3;
hence thesis;
end;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:80
Th80: for F,G be
Function st (
dom F)
= (
dom G) holds (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent iff ex P be
Permutation of (
dom F) st F
= (G
* P)
proof
let F,G be
Function;
assume
A1: (
dom F)
= (
dom G);
thus (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent implies ex P be
Permutation of (
dom F) st F
= (G
* P)
proof
assume (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent ;
then
consider I be
Function such that
A2: (
dom I)
= (
dom F) and
A3: (
rng I)
= (
dom G) and
A4: I is
one-to-one and
A5: F
= (G
* I) by
Th77;
reconsider I as
Function of (
dom F), (
dom F) by
A1,
A2,
A3,
FUNCT_2: 2;
reconsider I as
Permutation of (
dom F) by
A1,
A3,
A4,
FUNCT_2: 57;
take I;
thus thesis by
A5;
end;
given P be
Permutation of (
dom F) such that
A6: F
= (G
* P);
P is
Function of (
dom F), (
dom F) & (
dom F)
=
{} implies (
dom F)
=
{} ;
then (
rng P)
= (
dom F) & (
dom P)
= (
dom F) by
FUNCT_2:def 1,
FUNCT_2:def 3;
hence thesis by
A1,
A6,
Th77;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:81
for F,G be
Function st (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent holds (
card (
dom F))
= (
card (
dom G))
proof
let F,G be
Function;
assume (F,G)
are_fiberwise_equipotent ;
then (
card (F
" (
rng F)))
= (
card (G
" (
rng F))) & (
rng F)
= (
rng G) by
Th75,
Th78;
hence (
card (
dom F))
= (
card (G
" (
rng G))) by
RELAT_1: 134
.= (
card (
dom G)) by
RELAT_1: 134;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:82
for f be
set, p be
Relation holds for x be
set st x
in (
rng p) holds (
the_rank_of x)
in (
the_rank_of
[p, f])
proof
let f be
set;
let p be
Relation;
let y be
set;
assume y
in (
rng p);
then
consider x be
object such that
A1:
[x, y]
in p by
XTUPLE_0:def 13;
A2: p
in
{p, f} by
TARSKI:def 2;
A3:
{p, f}
in
{
{p, f},
{p}} by
TARSKI:def 2;
A4: y
in
{x, y} by
TARSKI:def 2;
A5:
{x, y}
in
{
{x, y},
{x}} by
TARSKI:def 2;
A6: (
the_rank_of y)
in (
the_rank_of
{x, y}) by
A4,
Th68;
A7: (
the_rank_of
{x, y})
in (
the_rank_of
[x, y]) by
A5,
Th68;
A8: (
the_rank_of p)
in (
the_rank_of
{p, f}) by
A2,
Th68;
A9: (
the_rank_of
{p, f})
in (
the_rank_of
[p, f]) by
A3,
Th68;
A10: (
the_rank_of y)
in (
the_rank_of
[x, y]) by
A6,
A7,
ORDINAL1: 10;
A11: (
the_rank_of
[x, y])
in (
the_rank_of p) by
A1,
Th68;
A12: (
the_rank_of p)
in (
the_rank_of
[p, f]) by
A8,
A9,
ORDINAL1: 10;
(
the_rank_of y)
in (
the_rank_of p) by
A10,
A11,
ORDINAL1: 10;
hence thesis by
A12,
ORDINAL1: 10;
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:83
for f,g,h be
Function st (
dom f)
= (
dom g) & (
rng f)
c= (
dom h) & (
rng g)
c= (
dom h) & (f,g)
are_fiberwise_equipotent holds ((h
* f),(h
* g))
are_fiberwise_equipotent
proof
let f,g,h be
Function such that
A1: (
dom f)
= (
dom g) and
A2: (
rng f)
c= (
dom h) and
A3: (
rng g)
c= (
dom h) and
A4: (f,g)
are_fiberwise_equipotent ;
consider p be
Permutation of (
dom f) such that
A5: f
= (g
* p) by
A1,
A4,
Th80;
A6: (
dom (h
* f))
= (
dom f) by
A2,
RELAT_1: 27;
A7: (
dom (h
* g))
= (
dom g) by
A3,
RELAT_1: 27;
(h
* f)
= ((h
* g)
* p) by
A5,
RELAT_1: 36;
hence thesis by
A1,
A6,
A7,
Th80;
end;
scheme ::
CLASSES1:sch2
LambdaAB { A,B() ->
set , F(
Element of B()) ->
set } :
ex f be
Function st (
dom f)
= A() & for x be
Element of B() st x
in A() holds (f
. x)
= F(x);
defpred
P[
object,
object] means ($1 is
Element of B() implies ex x be
Element of B() st x
= $1 & $2
= F(x)) & ( not $1 is
Element of B() implies $2
=
0 );
A1: for x be
object st x
in A() holds ex y be
object st
P[x, y]
proof
let x be
object;
assume x
in A();
per cases ;
suppose x is
Element of B();
then
reconsider z = x as
Element of B();
take F(z);
thus thesis;
end;
suppose not x is
Element of B();
hence thesis;
end;
end;
consider f be
Function such that
A2: (
dom f)
= A() and
A3: for x be
object st x
in A() holds
P[x, (f
. x)] from
NonUniqFuncEx(
A1);
take f;
thus (
dom f)
= A() by
A2;
let x be
Element of B();
assume x
in A();
then
P[x, (f
. x)] by
A3;
hence (f
. x)
= F(x);
end;
theorem ::
CLASSES1:84
for x,y be
set holds (
the_rank_of x)
in (
the_rank_of
[x, y]) & (
the_rank_of y)
in (
the_rank_of
[x, y])
proof
let x,y be
set;
{x}
in
{
{x, y},
{x}} by
TARSKI:def 2;
then
A1: (
the_rank_of
{x})
in (
the_rank_of
{
{x, y},
{x}}) by
Th68;
x
in
{x} by
TARSKI:def 1;
then (
the_rank_of x)
in (
the_rank_of
{x}) by
Th68;
hence (
the_rank_of x)
in (
the_rank_of
[x, y]) by
A1,
ORDINAL1: 10;
{x, y}
in
{
{x, y},
{x}} by
TARSKI:def 2;
then
A2: (
the_rank_of
{x, y})
in (
the_rank_of
{
{x, y},
{x}}) by
Th68;
y
in
{x, y} by
TARSKI:def 2;
then (
the_rank_of y)
in (
the_rank_of
{x, y}) by
Th68;
hence thesis by
A2,
ORDINAL1: 10;
end;