set IT = STC N;
set Ok = the Object-Kind of (STC N);
A1: NAT in {NAT} by TARSKI:def 1;
dom (NAT .--> NAT) = {NAT} by FUNCOP_1:19;
then A2: NAT in dom (NAT .--> NAT) by TARSKI:def 1;
the Object-Kind of (STC N) . NAT = ((NAT --> {[1,0,0],[0,0,0]}) +* (NAT .--> NAT)) . NAT by Def11
.= (NAT .--> NAT) . NAT by A2, FUNCT_4:14
.= NAT by A1, FUNCOP_1:13 ;
then ObjectKind (IC (STC N)) = NAT by Def11;
hence STC N is IC-Ins-separated by COMPOS_1:def 6; :: thesis: ( STC N is definite & STC N is realistic )
A3: the Instructions of (STC N) = {[1,0,0],[0,0,0]} by Def11;
thus STC N is definite :: thesis: STC N is realistic
proof
let l be Element of NAT ; :: according to COMPOS_1:def 8 :: thesis: the Object-Kind of (STC N) . l = the Instructions of (STC N)
dom (NAT .--> NAT) = {NAT} by FUNCOP_1:19;
then A5: not l in dom (NAT .--> NAT) by TARSKI:def 1;
thus the Object-Kind of (STC N) . l = ((NAT --> {[1,0,0],[0,0,0]}) +* (NAT .--> NAT)) . l by Def11
.= (NAT --> {[1,0,0],[0,0,0]}) . l by A5, FUNCT_4:12
.= the Instructions of (STC N) by A3, FUNCOP_1:13 ; :: thesis: verum
end;
assume the Instruction-Counter of (STC N) in NAT ; :: according to COMPOS_1:def 12 :: thesis: contradiction
hence contradiction by Def11; :: thesis: verum