let X be set ; :: thesis: for EqR1, EqR2, E being Equivalence_Relation of X st E = EqR1 \/ EqR2 holds
for x being set holds
( not x in X or Class E,x = Class EqR1,x or Class E,x = Class EqR2,x )
let EqR1, EqR2, E be Equivalence_Relation of X; :: thesis: ( E = EqR1 \/ EqR2 implies for x being set holds
( not x in X or Class E,x = Class EqR1,x or Class E,x = Class EqR2,x ) )
assume A1:
E = EqR1 \/ EqR2
; :: thesis: for x being set holds
( not x in X or Class E,x = Class EqR1,x or Class E,x = Class EqR2,x )
for x being set holds
( not x in X or Class E,x = Class EqR1,x or Class E,x = Class EqR2,x )
proof
let x be
set ;
:: thesis: ( not x in X or Class E,x = Class EqR1,x or Class E,x = Class EqR2,x )
assume
x in X
;
:: thesis: ( Class E,x = Class EqR1,x or Class E,x = Class EqR2,x )
assume that A2:
not
Class E,
x = Class EqR1,
x
and A3:
not
Class E,
x = Class EqR2,
x
;
:: thesis: contradiction
consider y being
set such that A4:
( (
y in Class E,
x & not
y in Class EqR1,
x ) or (
y in Class EqR1,
x & not
y in Class E,
x ) )
by A2, TARSKI:2;
consider z being
set such that A8:
( (
z in Class E,
x & not
z in Class EqR2,
x ) or (
z in Class EqR2,
x & not
z in Class E,
x ) )
by A3, TARSKI:2;
A12:
[y,x] in E
by A4, A5, Th27;
not
[y,x] in EqR1
by A4, A5, Th27;
then A13:
[y,x] in EqR2
by A1, A12, XBOOLE_0:def 3;
A14:
[z,x] in E
by A8, A9, Th27;
then
[x,z] in E
by Th12;
then A15:
[y,z] in E
by A12, Th13;
not
[z,x] in EqR2
by A8, A9, Th27;
then A16:
[z,x] in EqR1
by A1, A14, XBOOLE_0:def 3;
hence
contradiction
by A1, A15, A17, XBOOLE_0:def 3;
:: thesis: verum
end;
hence
for x being set holds
( not x in X or Class E,x = Class EqR1,x or Class E,x = Class EqR2,x )
; :: thesis: verum